On Thursday, March 19, the Constitutional Council upheld a measure that many co-ownership associations had been waiting for, and that some owners had been dreading: the possibility of prohibiting furnished tourist rentals in certain buildings, specifically when they are secondary residences. Behind the seemingly tranquil facades, the issue directly targets rentals via Airbnb, Abritel, or Booking, which have become a source of supplemental income for some, and a source of repeated disturbances for others.
In practical terms, the provision stemming from the Le Meur law of November 2024 allows a condominium association to oppose these rentals, under one clear condition: obtaining the agreement of two-thirds of the co-owners. The measure does not apply everywhere, only in buildings whose regulations contain a "bourgeois housing clause," a somewhat outdated term that means something very simple: the dwellings are intended for residential use, not for commercial activities disguised as hospitality.
When the "bourgeoisie" of regulations weighs heavily against rolling suitcases
It all started with a challenge in Caen. A property owner, targeted by a general meeting resolution banning tourist rentals for his secondary residences, took legal action by filing a priority preliminary ruling on constitutionality. His argument rested on two classic pillars: infringement of property rights and restriction of the freedom to conduct business, deemed disproportionate in the name of regulation.
The Constitutional Council did not agree. It considered that the impact remained regulated, limited to secondary residences and confined to condominiums where commercial use is already prohibited by the regulations. Another factor that weighed heavily: the law does not close the door to rentals; it simply changes the rules of the game, allowing long-term rentals, thus avoiding the scenario of a property becoming unusable and unsellable.
Ultimately, the decision reflects a very French trade-off: the peace of the building and the need for year-round housing versus the profitability of overnight stays. Condominium owners, burdened by late arrivals, key boxes, and the constant flow of strangers, see it as a safeguard, while some investors will view it as yet another constraint in an already tight market. Now, the reality on the ground remains: votes to be secured, tensions at general meetings, and the question hanging in the air of the stairwells: how many buildings will choose, tomorrow, to close their doors to tourists?
Community
Comments
Comments are open, but protected against spam. Initial posts and comments containing links undergo manual review.
Be the first to comment on this article.