The Court of Cassation ruled that an acquirer can be held liable for eviction indemnity due to imperfect delegation.
Extract
[...] The Court of cassation had gone further in a previous ruling of the commercial chamber of 7 December 2004, in which it had considered that the consent of the three parties could be given in a successive and not concomitant manner. This 2008 ruling is therefore an additional observation of the Court of Cassation's broad interpretation of the notion of consent in light of the imperfect delegation, which is therefore more accessible than the perfect delegation. It is in this way that the Court of cassation, due to the constitution of this imperfect delegation, has been able to admit the possibility for the victim company to request the payment of the eviction indemnity to the new acquirer. II. [...]
[...] This principle is set out in Article 1199 of the Civil Code. Thus, the only parties required to respect the terms of the contract are those who exchanged their consent at the time of its conclusion. The Court of Cassation, in this ruling, estimated that the new owner had tacitly exchanged his consent by signing the contract containing a clause similar to an imperfect delegation. This clause expressed in a clear and explicit manner the fact that the Claiming Society had accepted to pay a guarantee of eviction to the Society victim of a prejudice. [...]
[...] Court of Cassation, Civil Chamber March 2008, n°07-13.985 - To what extent does the principle of the relative effect of contracts condition the payment of an eviction indemnity to the acquirer? In this case, on 15 July 2002, Mr. Y signed a 9-year commercial lease for a local with the spouses X. On 15 November 2003, they also agreed to sell the building to the Cofrinvest company. Mr. Y subsequently sold his business to the Espace 92 company, which led to the transfer of the commercial lease to the buyer. [...]
[...] Perfect delegation is a form of novation by changing the debtor. It extinguishes the old obligation and creates a new identical one. On the contrary, imperfect delegation plays a role of guarantee for the delegatee in that it adds a new debtor alongside the first. Delegation requires consent. This consent is accepted if it is explicit, but the Court of Cassation, in this ruling, has admitted the tacit expression of consent which therefore constitutes the imperfect delegation. B. The implicit affirmation by the Court of the possibility of subscribing to an imperfect delegation tacitly According to the Court of Cassation : « such a clause was analyzed as an imperfect delegation ». [...]
[...] Thus, the Court of Cassation validly recalled that the consent could not be questioned here and that the payment had to be made. Thus, in this ruling, the jurisprudence clarifies that in the event of a lease with a refusal of renewal, the tenant can request the payment of the eviction indemnity to the acquirer who declared 'it's their personal business'. That's why she admitted the possibility for the victim Society to request the payment of the eviction indemnity to the acquirer in compensation for the prejudice caused by the refusal of renewal of the lease. [...]
