Squatter lawyer in Paris: assess the occupation, start eviction.

Begin by gathering the documents establishing your right to the property and the material describing the circumstances in which the occupant entered. For the prefectural route, Article 38 requires a criminal complaint, proof of the home or of ownership, and a record of the unlawful occupation. According to the text, that record must come from a judicial police officer (OPJ), the mayor or an enforcement officer (commissaire de justice). Photographs of the access points and written exchanges complete the file, but do not replace that record or necessarily show who is responsible for any forced entry. The firm then examines the administrative procedure and the possibility of an urgent eviction application, depending on the evidence and any title relied upon. Avoid forcing the occupant to leave yourself by threats or coercion: this private eviction is penalised by Article 226-4-2 of the Criminal Code.

Article 38 does not set a forty-eight-hour period after entry into the premises within which the right to request evacuation must be exercised. That period concerns the prefect's formal notice decision, counted from receipt of the request, after examination of the personal and family situation. It is therefore neither a limitation period on your request nor a promise that the home will physically be recovered. The formal notice then carries an enforcement period of at least twenty-four hours where the premises are the applicant's home. Where they are not the applicant's home, that period is extended to seven days, with a suspension mechanism if the urgent application provided for in the text is brought. The firm distinguishes between these stages in order to present a well-supported request and assess what follows if the occupant does not leave.

The administrative procedure under Article 38 is not limited to a main residence: it also covers premises used as housing. For a vacant property, it is necessary in particular to establish ownership and the required unlawful means of entry, and then to attach the criminal complaint and the record made by an authorised authority. An empty house therefore does not remove the need to document the manoeuvres, threats, acts of force or coercion relied upon in support of the request. If the premises are not the applicant's home, the administrative formal notice carries the seven-day period provided for in the text. The judicial route remains to be examined where the situation or the evidence justifies an eviction application before the competent judge. The exceptions to the judicial winter eviction moratorium are then assessed separately, because another person's home and other premises are not governed by exactly the same regime.

Article 38, in the wording in force since 20 August 2026, expressly covers staying on after the expiry of a furnished tourist rental contract. It would therefore be wrong to rule out this procedure solely because the initial entry was authorised for a tourist stay. It must nevertheless be verified that the contract does concern a furnished tourist rental within the meaning of Article L. 324-1-1 of the Tourism Code (Code du tourisme), and that its end date is established. The mere presence of a booking on a platform does not replace analysis of the contract, its extensions and the documents available. Send the booking, the agreed dates, the exchanges and the documents establishing your ownership, so that the criminal complaint and the required record can be prepared. The firm examines referral to the prefect and, depending on the objections raised, the judicial route for seeking eviction and an occupation indemnity.

First, the terms of the initial authorisation, its end date if any, and the way its termination was notified to the occupant must be determined. Accommodation provided without charge should not be presented as forced entry where you personally authorised the occupant to move into your home. In a case of accommodation with no fixed end date, the Grenoble judicial court examined the revocation of the authorisation and compliance with a reasonable notice period. It then held: "Remaining in the premises beyond that period thus amounts to a manifestly unlawful disturbance" (our translation) (TJ Grenoble, Ch4.3 JCP, 8 October 2026, No. 26/00134). That decision sets no universal notice period applicable to all accommodation arrangements, whose circumstances and agreements may differ. The firm examines the documents available before preparing the appropriate notification, and then the eviction application if remaining in the premises becomes unlawful.

Separation does not, on its own, make a former spouse an occupant of the home without right or title. The firm checks the lease, ownership of the property and the family decisions that may authorise or organise use of the home. Article 1751 of the Civil Code (Code civil) provides in particular for joint holding of the lease of the home actually used as the spouses' residence, even where the lease predates the marriage. It also provides that the right to the lease may be allocated to one of the spouses on divorce or judicial separation. A personal title or an allocation decision must therefore be examined before seeking eviction for occupation without right or title. Send the deeds and judgments available: they determine each party's current rights, the court to approach and the claims that can be considered.

Article L. 412-6 provides for a stay of judicial evictions from 1 November to 31 March, except in particular where rehousing meeting the statutory conditions is available. That stay does not apply to an eviction based on entry without title into another person's home by the unlawful means referred to in the text. For entry by those means into other premises, the judge may remove or reduce the benefit of the moratorium. Proof of these circumstances remains necessary: simply describing the occupant as a squatter is not enough to obtain application of a statutory exception. The Paris judicial court noted this in its decision of 25 November 2025 cited above, refusing to set aside the protections for lack of proof of the means of entry alleged. Finally, the bad faith referred to in Article L. 412-1 concerns the period following the formal demand and does not automatically remove the moratorium.

A claim for an occupation indemnity must be quantified and justified, specifying the period concerned and the material establishing the rental value of the property. In urgent proceedings, Article 835 allows an interim payment to be awarded where the existence of the obligation is not seriously contestable, within the limits of what is established. The Toulouse judicial court accordingly rejected an insufficiently documented claim: "The claim for a monthly occupation indemnity will therefore be dismissed as unjustified." (our translation) In the reasons for its decision of 28 January 2025 cited above, it notes in particular the absence of material making it possible to verify the rental value. The firm gathers the characteristics of the home, the rental references and the documents establishing the dates of occupation and of actual return of the premises. Damage or other separate losses that may be relied upon must be documented separately, and not confused with mere loss of enjoyment.

The firm begins by establishing your standing to act, the actual occupation of the property and the absence of any title allowing the occupant to remain. The documents must also make it possible to answer an accommodation authorisation, a contract or a family decision invoked in defence. The summons then sets out the manifestly unlawful disturbance, the claims concerning enforcement time limits and, where justified, an interim payment on the occupation indemnity. Article 835 allows that disturbance to be brought to an end even where there is a serious dispute, provided its manifestly unlawful nature is established. The hearing timetable and enforcement depend on the file; no overall time for recovering the home can be inferred from the mere fact of using urgent proceedings. The preliminary review is offered at €80 incl. VAT; it provides a first analysis of the documents sent before the appropriate steps are determined.