Estimated reading time (in minutes)
This judgment of rejection will attract attention, on the one hand, in that it relates to the regularity of the lessee’s registration in the RCS required by Article L. 145-1 of the Commercial Code and, on the other hand, on the other hand, because he is interested in the suspension of the prescription of the action to fix the renewal rent. In this case, the company taking up premises located in a Parisian business park had notified its lessor of a renewal offer (in application of art. L. 145-10, C. com.).
This solicitation was favorably received by the latter, provided however that the tenant justifies the conditions allowing him to claim renewal. Subsequently, the lessor seized the court to have the lessee judged that the lessee was not eligible for the right to renewal, as it was not registered for the premises leased. By way of counterclaim, the tenant requested that the renewal of his lease be noted under the terms and conditions of the contract that had expired. Regularity of the lessee’s registration in the RCS: The particularity of the case was that the rented premises were located in a vast business park grouping together, for the same address, a large number of buildings. However, the company was registered in building 29, when in reality,
From this error, the lessor concluded that the lessee had failed to register and, therefore, denied the latter any right to renewal (specifying that the registration of the lessee is only a condition for benefiting from the status of commercial leases for the renewal of the lease. This reasoning was not favored by either the Court of Appeal or the judge of law. For the latter, the Parisian judge “exactly retained” that the Commercial Code does not include any requirement concerning the identification of a building within a real estate complex, the Parisian judge was able to deduce from the situation that mentioning the address of the establishment was sufficient for its identification. Commercial Code merely asks for the address of the premises in question.the appreciation of the perfect identification of the premises fell within the sole appreciation of the trial judges.
Prescription of the action to set the renewal rent: in support of its request for renewal of the lease under the terms and conditions of the expired contract, the lessee claimed the inaction of the lessor who, within two years of the renewal of the contract, had not taken any action to fix the renewal rent. The lessor, for its part, considered that the period of Article L. 145-60 of the Commercial Code could not have started to run as long as the lessee’s right to renewal had not been established. I
Both the judge of the merits and the judge of law agree with the tenant, because the suspension of the prescription when a right (in this case, the right to renewal) is subordinated to the solution of an action in progress supposes that is characterized by an impossibility to act. However, in the present case, the lessor having requested an act that he was offering the renewal of the lease if his main request for denial of the status was not accepted, he was quite capable of filing a request for fixing of the price of the renewed lease. Grégory Damy , business law, Nice lawyer
