If you own a rental flat in Paris or elsewhere in the Île-de-France region, or if you rent your home there as an expatriate, two questions return every year with mechanical regularity: by how much can the rent lawfully go up, and what can the owner actually recover in service charges? French residential law answers both questions with unusual precision. Rents in unfurnished and furnished homes let as a primary residence move, in principle, only through the indice de référence des loyers (IRL) (rent reference index) published each quarter by INSEE. In Paris and several other tight markets, a second ceiling applies on top of it: the encadrement des loyers (rent capping system) built on reference rents set by prefectoral order. And the monthly provisions for charges locatives (recoverable service charges) are only advances: once a year, the owner must strike a balance between what was collected and what was genuinely spent, and prove every euro with documents.
This guide explains, for foreign landlords and tenants, how the annual rent revision works in 2026, what the Paris rent caps add to it, and how the yearly settlement of service charges is controlled by the courts. It draws on the statutes in force and on five recent rulings of the Cour de cassation (French supreme court for civil matters), including two delivered in December 2025 and February 2026. The general framework of the residential lease is set by the Civil Code: « Le louage des choses est un contrat par lequel l’une des parties s’oblige à faire jouir l’autre d’une chose pendant un certain temps, et moyennant un certain prix que celle-ci s’oblige de lui payer. » (Article 1709 of the Civil Code) In other words, the lease is a contract for the enjoyment of a thing for a certain time and for a certain price — and French law supervises both the price and the charges with particular care. Readers looking for an overview of our firm’s property practice can also visit our real estate law practice in Paris.
I. Raising the rent during the lease: the IRL mechanism
A. How the annual revision works in practice
The starting point is simple but often misunderstood. Under Article 17-1 of the Act of 6 July 1989 (loi n° 89-462 du 6 juillet 1989), which governs residential tenancies, the rent of a bail d’habitation (residential lease) can be revised once a year only if the lease contains a revision clause. Without such a clause, the owner cannot impose any increase during the lease, however much the cost of living has risen. Foreign buyers who let out their Paris apartment through a managing agent should therefore check, before anything else, whether their lease actually contains the clause: many standard leases do, but its absence is fatal to any increase, and no subsequent demand can cure it for the elapsed period.
Where the clause exists, the increase is not discretionary. It is computed exclusively by reference to the indice de référence des loyers (IRL), the index published every quarter by INSEE and based on consumer prices excluding tobacco and rents. The formula used by the administration is straightforward: new rent equals current rent multiplied by the IRL of the reference quarter for the current year, divided by the IRL of the same quarter of the previous year. Only the same quarter may be compared from one year to the next, and the lease designates which quarter governs — most commonly the quarter of the lease anniversary or, for older leases, the second quarter.
The figures currently applicable are known with precision. For the second quarter of 2026, the IRL stands at 148.37, an annual rise of 1.15% after +0.78% in the previous quarter, as published by INSEE on 10 July 2026 in Informations Rapides No. 167. The administration gives the following worked example, which foreign owners can transpose directly: for a lease fixing the rent at 600 euros, with the second-quarter index at 148.37 for the current year against 146.68 for the same quarter of the previous year, the revised rent is 600 × 148.37 / 146.68 = 606.91 euros. The order of magnitude matters: with the index rising by around one percent a year, the lawful increase on a 2,000-euro Paris rent is roughly 20 to 25 euros a month — enough to preserve the yield, but far from the increases sometimes demanded informally.
Three procedural safeguards then frame the demand, and each of them generates disputes. First, the owner must claim the revision within one year of its effective date. The revision never applies retroactively: it takes effect only from the date of the demand. Once the one-year period has expired, the unclaimed increase is definitively lost. A landlord who remembers in September 2026 that the January 2025 revision was never applied can still claim the January 2026 revision, but the 2025 increase is gone. Second, since 24 August 2022 in metropolitan France, any revision is prohibited for dwellings rated F or G on the diagnostic de performance énergétique (DPE) (energy performance certificate), whether at signature, renewal or tacit renewal. Owners of poorly rated Paris apartments — still numerous in Haussmann-era buildings — must therefore renovate before they can raise the rent, and tenants can lawfully refuse any increase on such a dwelling. Third, the demand should be made in writing, ideally by registered letter, stating the calculation and the index values used, so that the one-year clock and the non-retroactivity can be proved later.
For tenants, the practical reflex is symmetrical: verify the clause, verify the quarter, verify the arithmetic, and verify the DPE rating. Errors are frequent, particularly when a managing agent applies the wrong quarter’s index or compounds two years of increases at once. For owners, the discipline is to diary the revision date, send the demand on time, and keep the DPE under review. In Paris and the inner suburbs, where most leases fall within a tight market, a fourth check then applies — the rent cap — which is examined in Part II.
B. When the indexation clause itself fails
Sometimes the problem is not the calculation but the clause. French law distrusts automatic indexation: Article L. 112-1 of the Monetary and Financial Code provides that « Sous réserve des dispositions du premier alinéa de l’article L. 112-2 et des articles L. 112-3, L. 112-3-1 et L. 112-4 , l’indexation automatique des prix de biens ou de services est interdite. » (Article L. 112-1 of the Monetary and Financial Code) In plain English, the automatic indexation of prices is prohibited except within the statutory exceptions — and residential rent revision under the 1989 Act is one of the permitted frameworks, provided the clause respects the correspondence between the index period and the rent period. A clause that disconnects the two can be declared réputée non écrite (deemed unwritten) by the courts, which means it is treated as if it had never existed for the distorted period.
The Cour de cassation clarified the exact scope of that sanction in a ruling of 5 February 2026 (Third Civil Chamber, No. 24-11.584, rejection of the appeal, official text on courdecassation.fr). The case concerned a long lease under which the charge was re-evaluated each year on the basis of the INSEE construction-cost index, with a fixed base index. The Court approved the reasoning that a clause referring to a fixed base index does not breach Article L. 112-1 where there is concordance between the index variation period and the rent variation period, the revision index then having to correspond to the same quarter as the reference index. Crucially, the Court added that « lorsque la période de variation indiciaire est supérieure à la durée s’étant écoulée entre deux révisions, la clause était réputée non écrite pour la seule période durant laquelle la distorsion était caractérisée. » In other words, where the index variation period exceeds the time elapsed between two revisions, the clause is deemed unwritten only for the period during which the distortion existed — not for the whole lease. In that case, the first two revisions were distorted, but the later ones were computed correctly, so the clause survived for the later periods.
The lesson for foreign owners and tenants is concrete. A clause that takes, for example, an annual index to revise a rent semi-annually, or that mixes quarters, exposes the owner to a claim that the increase is void for the affected years — while leaving the rest of the lease intact. Conversely, a tenant who discovers a distorted clause cannot necessarily erase every past increase: the sanction is surgical, period by period. Anyone reviewing a lease signed years ago, particularly leases drafted before the current IRL system stabilised, should have the indexation mechanics checked against the actual revision dates rather than assuming the stated rent is correct. The Civil Code’s version of this principle for leases generally appears in Article 1709 of the Civil Code, Article 1719 of the Civil Code on the landlord’s obligations, and Article 1728 of the Civil Code on the tenant’s duty to pay the agreed price — the price being, precisely, what the lawful clause produces.
II. Paris rent caps and the yearly service-charge settlement
A. Living with the encadrement: reference rents and the complément de loyer
In Paris, the IRL is only half the story. Since 1 July 2019, rents of homes let as a primary residence (or under a bail mobilité, mobility lease) are capped by the encadrement des loyers: each year, the prefect sets a loyer de référence (reference rent), a loyer de référence majoré (increased reference rent, the ceiling) and a loyer de référence minoré (decreased reference rent, the floor), expressed per square metre of living space by category of dwelling and by geographical sector. The loyer de base (basic rent, excluding charges and excluding any supplement) stated in the lease may not exceed the increased reference rent in force on the signing date. The same system applies in several other tight markets — in Île-de-France notably Est Ensemble and Plaine Commune alongside Paris, and in the provinces Lyon, Villeurbanne, Bordeaux, Montpellier, Lille and parts of Grenoble and the Basque Country — but Paris remains its heartland and its most litigated field. Breach is punished by an administrative fine of up to 5,000 euros, or 15,000 euros where the landlord is a legal entity, and the property advertisement itself must state the regulated amounts.
The lease must therefore mention the basic rent, the applicable reference rent and the applicable increased reference rent. If it omits the increased reference rent, the tenant has one month from the lease’s effective date to put the owner on formal notice by registered letter; the owner then has one month to reply, failing which the tenant may seize the juge des contentieux de la protection (protection litigation judge) within three months. Foreign landlords who sign leases remotely, through an agent, should verify that these figures actually appear in the document: an omission opens a fast track to court within the first months of the tenancy.
Above the ceiling, one door remains open: the complément de loyer (additional rent). It may be stipulated only for dwellings with particular characteristics of comfort or location by comparison with dwellings of the same category in the same geographical sector, and both its amount and the justifying characteristics must be stated in the lease. Since 18 August 2022, however, any additional rent is prohibited where the dwelling shows even one of a statutory list of defects: sanitary facilities on the landing, signs of damp on walls, a DPE rating of F or G, windows letting air through abnormally, a vis-à-vis of less than ten metres, water infiltration, drainage problems in the last three months, a degraded electrical installation, or poor exposure of the main room. A Paris attic with a ten-metre vis-à-vis or a damp wall cannot lawfully carry a supplement, however spectacular its view.
Tenants are not without weapons against an unjustified supplement. They must first seize the commission départementale de conciliation (CDC) (departmental conciliation commission) within three months of signing the lease, and it is for the owner to prove that the supplement is justified. If conciliation fails, the tenant has three months from receipt of the commission’s opinion to ask the protection litigation judge to cancel or reduce the supplement; the judge’s rent applies from the lease’s effective date. Owners, symmetrically, should assemble their evidence before signing: photographs, plans, exposure measurements and a reasoned comparison with the sector, because the burden of proof rests on them and the three-month clock runs fast.
The courts apply these rules with a close eye on the facts. On 4 December 2025, the Third Civil Chamber rejected a Paris tenant’s appeal against a supplement (No. 24-15.589, official text on courdecassation.fr). The flat, let at 5,200 euros a month, commanded an indexed rent above the increased reference rent at renewal, and the owner claimed a supplement. The Court of Appeal had found that the flat enjoyed an unobstructed view of a prestigious and emblematic historic church, a characteristic specific to the rented dwelling given its immediate proximity to the church it faced and its fourth-floor position. The Cour de cassation held that the lower court « ce dont elle a pu déduire que la bailleresse était fondée à réclamer, en sus du loyer de référence majoré applicable, un complément de loyer dont elle a souverainement apprécié le montant. » In English: the court could properly deduce from those findings that the landlady was entitled to claim, on top of the applicable increased reference rent, an additional rent whose amount it assessed at its sovereign discretion. The message is balanced: a genuine, localised prestige characteristic can justify a supplement, but it must be specific to the dwelling — a generic claim that “Paris is full of monuments” was expressly rejected — and the amount remains subject to judicial control.
At renewal, the cap system works in both directions, and procedure is everything. Where the basic rent is below the decreased reference rent, the owner may bring an action for revaluation; where it exceeds the increased reference rent, the tenant may bring an action for reduction. In a ruling of 24 November 2021 (Third Civil Chamber, No. 20-18.411, cassation, official text on courdecassation.fr), the Court censured a Court of Appeal that had fixed a renewed rent by reference to a prefectoral order of 25 June 2015 which, by its own terms, entered into force only on 1 August 2015 — after the 30 June 2015 notification of the proposed rent. The Court recalled that « le juge saisi d’une action en réévaluation de loyer est tenu de vérifier, même d’office, si les conditions d’application de la loi étaient réunies à la date de la notification de la proposition du montant du loyer du bail renouvelé. » That is: a judge hearing a rent revaluation action must verify, even of his own motion, whether the statutory conditions were met on the date the proposed renewed rent was notified. A revaluation built on a reference-rent order that was not yet in force collapses, and the judge must raise the point himself. Foreign owners preparing a renewal in Paris should therefore check not only the current reference rents — available through the official Paris simulator and the DRIHL reference-rent estimator — but also which order was in force on the exact date of their proposal, since any resulting increase is, moreover, spread by sixths per year.
B. Service charges: provisions, the annual statement and the burden of proof
Alongside the rent, most tenants pay monthly provisions pour charges (advance payments on account for service charges). These are exactly that — advances. Under Article 23 of the 1989 Act, as restated by the Cour de cassation, « Selon le second, les charges locatives peuvent donner lieu au versement de provisions et doivent, en ce cas, faire l’objet d’une régularisation au moins annuelle. » (Cass. 3rd Civ., 18 Sept. 2025, No. 23-21.899) In English: service charges may be collected through provisions and must, in that case, be settled at least once a year. One month before the settlement, the owner must send the tenant the décompte de charges (itemised statement) broken down by nature of charge together with, in collective buildings, the apportionment method between tenants; for six months from dispatch, the supporting documents must be kept available to tenants. The administration confirms the mechanics: provisions are set from the forecast budget and the previous settlement, and the yearly settlement compares total provisions collected against expenditure actually incurred — with a specific yearly water-bill information duty where meters are not individualised.
The sanction for neglecting this accounting can be severe, as a ruling of 18 September 2025 shows (Third Civil Chamber, No. 23-21.899, cassation, official text on courdecassation.fr). The landlord had served a termination notice for serious and legitimate reason over unpaid rent, obtained termination of the lease and an order for arrears including charges, while the tenant counterclaimed for repetition of sums unduly paid. The Court gave its visa on the former Article 1184 of the Civil Code — the implied resolutory condition in synallagmatic contracts, now Article 1224 of the Civil Code — together with Article 1741 of the Civil Code, under which « Le contrat de louage se résout par la perte de la chose louée, et par le défaut respectif du bailleur et du preneur de remplir leurs engagements. » That is: the lease is terminated by the loss of the thing leased, and by the respective failure of landlord and tenant to perform their undertakings. Because the Court of Appeal had ordered termination and payment of charges without properly applying the Article 23 accounting requirements recalled above, the ruling was quashed. The practical meaning is stark: an owner who wants to terminate for arrears, or simply to collect them, must present a clean, documented charges account — provisions, yearly statements, breakdowns — or the whole edifice, including termination, can fall.
A second ruling makes the evidential standard even more explicit. On 17 June 2021 (Third Civil Chamber, No. 20-17.251, partial cassation, official text on courdecassation.fr), a tenant of a public housing office claimed restitution of charges paid since 2013. The lower court had rejected the claim, reasoning that the office justified the expenditure in accordance with the decree of 26 August 1987 — the decree listing recoverable charges. The Cour de cassation quashed that reasoning, noting « que celui-ci se bornait à produire, pour justifier des charges locatives réclamées à M. [S], le seul décret du 26 août 1987 et la liste des charges récupérables ». In English: the office had merely produced, to justify the service charges claimed, the decree of 26 August 1987 alone and the list of recoverable charges. Producing the list of what is in principle recoverable does not prove that the sums were actually spent on the building and correctly apportioned. The court below had, in the Court’s words, distorted the office’s own pleadings by treating that list as proof. For foreign landlords, the consequence is direct: keep the syndic’s (managing agent’s) annual accounts, the invoices, the tantièmes apportionment and the settlement statements, and transmit the breakdown on time. For tenants, the consequence is equally direct: ask for the décompte every year, consult the supporting documents within the six-month window, and challenge anything that is merely asserted rather than documented.
Time limits complete the picture and run in both directions. A landlord may recover unpaid rent and charges going back three years, including after the tenant has left; a tenant who overpaid has three years to recover the excess. If the owner missed an annual rent revision, he has one year to act — the rule examined in Part I. These are three-year and one-year extinctive prescription periods, to be distinguished from the general five-year period of Article 2224 of the Civil Code for personal actions. In practice, this means a 2026 audit can still reach back to 2023 charges, but 2022 provisions settled without challenge are normally out of reach. Foreign owners who entrust their flat to an agency should therefore mandate, in writing, the yearly settlement routine: claim the building accounts from the syndic de copropriété (co-ownership managing agent), compute the balance per tenant, dispatch the décompte at least a month before booking the adjustment, and archive the supporting documents for the six-month consultation period. Paris co-ownership charges are among the heaviest in France — caretaker, lift, heating, works funds — so the settlement often moves hundreds or thousands of euros, and sloppiness is expensive. Tenants, for their part, should never pay a “regularisation” presented as a single unexplained figure: the law entitles them to the nature-by-nature breakdown and the apportionment key, and the cases above show that courts enforce that right strictly.
Conclusion
Raising a French residential rent and settling its service charges are two exercises in applied arithmetic under judicial supervision. During the lease, only a revision clause allows an increase, only the IRL measures it — 148.37 for the second quarter of 2026, up 1.15% year on year — and only a demand made within the year gives it effect, with no retroactivity and no increase at all for F- or G-rated dwellings. In Paris, the increased reference rent caps the basic rent, the complément de loyer demands specific, stated and lawful characteristics proved by the owner, and renewal revaluations stand or fall on the order in force at the notification date, as the judge must verify of his own motion. On charges, provisions are advances and nothing more: the yearly statement, the breakdown, the six-month availability of documents and the actual proof of expenditure condition every recovery — and a termination built on unproven charges can be quashed. Foreign landlords who diary these deadlines, demand the building accounts each year and document every supplement, and foreign tenants who check the quarter, the cap and the breakdown, will rarely be caught out. Our firm’s Paris real estate team assists owners and tenants across Paris and the Île-de-France region with revision demands, cap disputes and charges audits.
Need a quick opinion on your case
If your rent increase, your Paris rent cap or your annual service-charge bill raises a doubt, our office offers a telephone consultation within 48 hours with one of the firm’s lawyers. The first consultation is billed at 80 EUR including VAT. You can reach us directly at +33 6 46 60 58 22 or through our contact page. We receive clients in Paris and advise throughout the Île-de-France region.