Real Estate Company's Repentance Renders Eviction Appeal Moot
France (FR)
Synthèse Legislator
Généré par l'IAA civil real estate company, having refused the renewal of a commercial lease and been ordered to pay eviction indemnity, subsequently communicated to the former tenant its decision to exercise its right of repentance by offering a new nine-year lease under the same terms but with a new price, which act constituted an acquiescence to the judgment rendered against it; consequently, the Supreme Court found the appeal inadmissible because the appellant's subsequent action rendered the appeal moot by acknowledging the judgment it sought to overturn.
Regeste Legislator
Généré par l'IAReal Estate Company's Repentance Renders Eviction Appeal Moot: A civil real estate company, having refused the renewal of a commercial lease and been ordered to pay eviction indemnity, subsequently communicated to the former tenant its decision to exercise its right of repentance by offering a new nine-year lease under the same terms but with a new price, which act constituted an acquiescence to the judgment rendered against it; consequently, the Supreme Court found the appeal inadmissible because the appellant's subsequent action rendered the appeal moot by acknowledging the judgment it sought to overturn.
Mots-clés
Généré par l'IADécisions connexes
Généré par l'IAQuestions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator
Généré par l'IAThis statement constitutes the operative part of the decision, declaring the appeal inadmissible because it has become moot (sans objet).
Texte complet
SUR LA FIN DE NON-RECEVOIR OPPOSEE PAR LA DEFENSE :
ATTENDU, SELON L'ARRET ATTAQUE (PARIS, 5 JUILLET 1979), QUE LA SOCIETE CIVILE IMMOBILIERE TOLBIAC-CHEVALERET, QUI AVAIT REFUSE LE RENOUVELLEMENT DU BAIL COMMERCIAL CONSENTI PAR ELLE A LA SOCIETE SIMPLIMAX, A ETE CONDAMNEE A PAYER A CELLE-CI UNE INDEMNITE D'EVICTION; ATTENDU QUE, POSTERIEUREMENT AU POURVOI EN CASSATION FORME PAR LA SCI TOLBIAC-CHEVALERET CONTRE CET ARRET, CETTE SOCIETE A NOTIFIE A LA SOCIETE SIMPLIMAX QU'ELLE NE POUVAIT ACCEPTER DE PAYER L'INDEMNITE FIXEE PAR L'ARRET ET ENTENDAIT EXERCER SON DROIT DE REPENTIR EN LUI CONSENTANT UN BAIL DE NEUF ANS MOYENNANT UN NOUVEAU PRIX, TOUTES CLAUSES, CHARGES ET CONDITIONS DU BAIL EXPIRE DEMEURANT INCHANGEES; QUE LE REPENTIR AINSI EXERCE A CONSTITUE UN ACQUIESCEMENT A L'ARRET ET QUE LA FIN DE NON-RECEVOIR OPPOSEE PAR LE DEFENDEUR AU POURVOI ET FONDEE SUR CET ACQUIESCEMENT, EST, DES LORS, JUSTIFIEE;
PAR CES MOTIFS :
CONSTATE QUE LE POURVOI EST DEVENU SANS OBJET ET SE TROUVE, DES LORS, IRRECEVABLE.