Limitation period for unpaid rent: time limits and rules 2026

Unpaid rent-related claims are a major concern for landlords, whether they are individual owners or property management companies. The limitation period (prescription) for these claims is governed by specific rules that differ according to the nature of the lease and the status of the debtor. A command of the limitation periods and of the mechanisms for interrupting them directly determines the creditor's ability to recover the sums due. This analysis examines the legal regime applicable to rent-related claims in 2026, taking into account recent legislative changes and the case law established by the Cour de cassation.

The ordinary limitation period for rent-related claims

Application of the five-year period since the Law of 17 June 2008

Since the entry into force of Law No. 2008-561 of 17 June 2008 reforming limitation periods in civil matters, the limitation period for rent-related claims follows, unless a special provision applies, the ordinary regime laid down in Article 2224 of the French Civil Code. This provision states that personal actions or actions relating to movable property are time-barred after five years from the day on which the holder of a right knew or should have known the facts enabling them to exercise it. Residential leases governed by the Law of 6 July 1989 are subject to a special provision, examined below.

The five-year period of Article 2224 applies to claims for rent, service charges, indemnities and ancillary sums due under leases that are not governed by a special provision, in particular commercial leases. It does not apply to residential leases governed by the Law of 6 July 1989, under which actions are time-barred after three years. The rules applicable to sums called by the syndicate of co-owners (syndicat des copropriétaires) are examined in our article on the limitation period for co-ownership charges.

Starting point of the limitation period

The limitation period runs from the date on which each instalment becomes due. For rent payable in advance on the first day of the month, the rent for January becomes due on 1 January; the action for payment is time-barred, depending on the lease, three or five years after that date.

The three-year limitation regime for residential leases

Article 7-1 of the Law of 6 July 1989

Since Law No. 2014-366 of 24 March 2014, known as the ALUR Law, Article 7-1 of Law No. 89-462 of 6 July 1989 provides that all actions arising from a lease are time-barred after three years from the day on which the holder of a right knew or should have known the facts enabling them to exercise that right. The landlord's action for review of the rent is time-barred one year after the date agreed in the lease for reviewing the rent.

Article 2277 of the French Civil Code, often cited in this connection, no longer governs the limitation period for rent: in the version resulting from the Law of 17 June 2008, it concerns acquisitive prescription in respect of movable property. The former Article 2277, which in particular made rent subject to a five-year limitation period, was replaced by that law.

Interaction with the ordinary rules

The three-year period of Article 7-1 applies to actions arising from residential leases governed by the Law of 6 July 1989, whether they concern rent, service charges, tenant repairs or the return of the security deposit. Leases that fall outside the scope of that law, in particular commercial and professional leases, remain subject to the five-year period of Article 2224 of the French Civil Code.

The mechanisms for interrupting the limitation period

Interruption by court proceedings

Article 2241 of the French Civil Code provides that a claim brought before a court, even in summary proceedings (référé), interrupts the limitation period as well as the forfeiture period (forclusion). Article 2244 adds that the period is also interrupted by a protective measure taken under the French Code of Civil Enforcement Procedures or by an act of enforcement. The interruption wipes out the period already elapsed and causes a new period of the same length as the previous one to run (Article 2231).

The claim must be brought against the actual debtor of the claim. Where there are several tenants, a formal notice (mise en demeure) to or the summons of a single co-tenant does not interrupt the limitation period as regards the others, unless the lease contains an express joint and several liability clause.

Referral to the departmental conciliation commission (commission départementale de conciliation) provided for in Article 20 of the Law of 6 July 1989 is not a claim before a court within the meaning of Article 2241 of the French Civil Code. Article 2238 of the same code only provides for the suspension of the limitation period from the day on which, after a dispute has arisen, the parties agree to resort to mediation or conciliation. A landlord whose claim is approaching the end of the limitation period should therefore not rely on this referral alone.

Interruption by acknowledgement by the debtor

Article 2240 of the French Civil Code provides that the limitation period is interrupted by the debtor's acknowledgement of the right of the person against whom the period was running. This acknowledgement may result from a document signed by the debtor or from their unequivocal conduct.

In lease matters, interruption by acknowledgement is frequently seen in amicable negotiations where the tenant acknowledges the debt while requesting time to pay. A payment schedule signed by the parties constitutes an express acknowledgement interrupting the limitation period.

The Cour de cassation requires the acknowledgement to relate to the existence of the claim and not merely to its amount. A simple undertaking to pay "what will be due" is not a sufficient acknowledgement if the very existence of the debt is disputed.

The formal demand for payment

The formal demand for payment (commandement de payer) does not, as such, appear among the causes of interruption listed in Articles 2240 to 2244 of the French Civil Code, which cover acknowledgement by the debtor, a claim before a court, a protective measure and an act of enforcement. Articles 1343-5 and 1344-1 of the French Civil Code, sometimes cited in this connection, concern respectively the time to pay that the court may grant and the formal notice that causes default interest to run; they do not govern the interruption of the limitation period.

In lease law, the formal demand for payment invoking the termination clause (clause résolutoire), served by a commissaire de justice (bailiff), opens the period at the end of which the clause may take effect. It does not relieve the landlord, where the limitation period is approaching its end, from bringing a claim before a court or obtaining an acknowledgement of debt. The remedies available to a commercial landlord faced with arrears, from the formal demand invoking the termination clause to attachments, are presented in our article on unpaid rent under a commercial lease.

The limitation period and termination of the lease

Preservation of claims arising before termination

The termination of the lease, whether by court order or automatically, does not extinguish claims that arose previously. These rent-related claims retain their own limitation regime and continue to run in accordance with the general rules.

Occupation indemnity after termination

The occupation indemnity owed by an occupier without right or title after termination of the lease is a separate claim subject to its own limitation period. This indemnity runs from the expiry of the notice period or from service of the termination, as the case may be.

The effects of the expiry of the limitation period

Extinction of the claim

The expiry of the limitation period extinguishes the landlord's right of action. It does not operate automatically: the court may not raise the limitation defence of its own motion (Article 2247 of the French Civil Code), and it must be raised by the debtor; unless waived, it may be raised at any stage of the proceedings, even before the court of appeal (Article 2248).

Waiver and contractual adjustment of the limitation period

Article 2250 of the French Civil Code provides that only a limitation period that has already run may be waived. Moreover, although Article 2254 allows the parties to shorten or extend the limitation period, without reducing it to less than one year or extending it to more than ten years, this option is excluded for actions for payment or recovery of rent, farm rent and service charges. A lease clause altering these periods is therefore ineffective.

On the other hand, a limitation period that has already expired may still be waived. A tenant may thus waive the benefit of the limitation period by voluntarily paying a time-barred claim or by expressly acknowledging their debt.

The limitation period and guarantees

Fate of personal guarantees

The guarantor may raise against the creditor all defences, whether personal to the debtor or inherent in the debt, that belong to the debtor (Article 2298 of the French Civil Code, as amended by Ordinance No. 2021-1192 of 15 September 2021, in force since 1 January 2022). The limitation of the principal debt is one of those defences.

Conversely, a demand made on the principal debtor or an acknowledgement by the principal debtor interrupts the limitation period against the guarantor (Article 2246 of the French Civil Code).

A landlord who allows its claim against the tenant to become time-barred therefore cannot obtain payment from the guarantor; it does, however, retain the benefit, as against the guarantor, of interruptive acts directed against the tenant.

Security deposit and limitation

The security deposit (dépôt de garantie) paid by the tenant at the start of the lease is a claim separate from the claim for rent. For a residential lease governed by the Law of 6 July 1989, it must be returned within one month of the return of the keys where the check-out inventory matches the check-in inventory, and within two months otherwise (Article 22); the action for its return is time-barred after three years (Article 7-1).

Setting off the security deposit against time-barred rent claims raises complex legal difficulties. The case law tends to accept such set-off where the landlord demonstrates the existence of certain claims at the time of the check-out inventory (état des lieux de sortie). The question of deducting a time-barred occupation indemnity from the security deposit is dealt with separately in our article on the security deposit and remaining in the premises.

Proof of limitation in lease matters

Burden of proof

A debtor who invokes the limitation period must prove that the required period has elapsed. In lease matters, this proof is generally established by producing rent receipts, account statements or correspondence making it possible to determine the date on which the last sum became due.

Limitation may be proved by any means. The landlord may thus demonstrate that the period was interrupted by producing bailiff's deeds (actes d'huissier), correspondence from the tenant or any document establishing an acknowledgement of debt.

The issue of electronic evidence

The shift of property management practices towards digital tools raises new questions regarding proof of limitation. Electronic statements, emails and digital payment histories are admissible evidence, provided that the conditions of Article 1366 of the French Civil Code are met.

Frequently asked questions

Are claims for service charges subject to the same limitation period as rent?

Yes. Service charges are subject to the same limitation period as rent: three years for a residential lease governed by the Law of 6 July 1989 (Article 7-1), five years in other cases (Article 2224 of the French Civil Code). The period runs from the date on which each provisional payment or adjustment of charges becomes due.

Does a simple formal notice interrupt the limitation period for unpaid rent?

No, a simple formal notice sent by registered letter does not interrupt the limitation period. Articles 2240 to 2244 of the French Civil Code reserve this effect to acknowledgement by the debtor, a claim before a court, a protective measure and an act of enforcement. The formal notice only causes default interest to run (Article 1344-1).

What limitation period applies to compensation for damage recorded at the end of the lease?

Compensation for damage is time-barred after three years for a residential lease governed by the Law of 6 July 1989 (Article 7-1) and after five years in other cases (Article 2224 of the French Civil Code), from the day on which the landlord knew or should have known of the damage, which in practice is generally at the check-out inventory.

Does a payment schedule prevent the limitation period from running?

A payment schedule signed by the tenant constitutes an acknowledgement of debt which interrupts the limitation period for the claims it lists (Article 2240 of the French Civil Code). The interruption causes a new period of the same length as the previous one to run from the signature (Article 2231). Failure to comply with the payment schedule has no effect on this new period.

Does the limitation period apply differently depending on the type of lease (residential, commercial, rural)?

Yes. Residential leases governed by the Law of 6 July 1989 are subject to the three-year period of Article 7-1 of that law. Other leases, in particular commercial and professional leases, are subject to the five-year period of Article 2224 of the French Civil Code, without prejudice to the special time limits applicable to certain actions.

How is the limitation period calculated where co-tenants are jointly and severally liable?

Where there is a joint and several liability clause, a demand made on one of the jointly and severally liable co-tenants by a claim before a court or by an act of enforcement, as well as acknowledgement of the debt by one of them, interrupts the limitation period against all the others (Article 2245 of the French Civil Code). In the absence of joint and several liability, the interruptive act only has effect as regards the co-tenant against whom it is directed.

Can the guarantor invoke the limitation of the principal debt?

Yes. Since 1 January 2022, Article 2298 of the French Civil Code has allowed the guarantor to raise against the creditor all defences, whether personal to the debtor or inherent in the debt, that belong to the debtor, which includes the limitation of the principal debt.

Ultimately, a command of the limitation regime for rent-related claims requires identifying the applicable period, three years for residential leases governed by the Law of 6 July 1989 and five years in other cases, together with the acts that interrupt it. Each stage of the landlord and tenant relationship should be documented and swift action taken in the event of arrears in order to preserve the effectiveness of the available remedies.