Three Contexts, Same Indices
Indices appear in French commercial leases in three distinct contexts, each governed by different rules:
- The three-year statutory review (Art. L. 145-38 C. com.): uses the ILC or ILAT to cap the reviewed rent. The parties cannot choose different indices for this calculation — the statutory rule is mandatory;
- The renewal rent cap (Art. L. 145-34 C. com.): also uses the ILC or ILAT, replacing the ICC which was removed in 2014;
- The contractual indexation clause: the parties have more latitude — they can choose the ILC, ILAT, or ICC, or any index with a direct connection to the lease or one party’s activity, or in certain cases the general price level.
A choice that is lawful in one context may be unlawful in another. Keep the three contexts separate when drafting or reviewing any index provision.
ILC or ILAT: Which Applies to Which Activity
The framework is set out in Article D. 112-2 of the Code monétaire et financier. Both indices are composite indices published quarterly by INSEE, but they track different economic variables and apply to different categories of activity.
The boundary between ILC and ILAT is not always clear. The ILAT was introduced in 2011 and its scope remains imprecisely defined, since “tertiary activities” has no statutory definition. The determining factor for grey-zone premises is the nature of the activity, not the physical format of the premises. A bank branch is a commercial activity (ILC); a property management company collecting rents without trading commercially arguably uses ILAT.
The most disputed category is what practitioners call “boutique-bureaux”: premises that look like offices but are used for commercial activity — bank branches, insurance agencies, real estate agencies. The determining factor is the nature of the activity, not the physical format. Where there is doubt, identify the applicable index at the time of drafting and state the reasoning in the lease, so the choice is not challenged years later when the indices have diverged.
The ICC: No Longer Used for Reviews and Renewals, But Still Permitted for Indexation
The Indice du Coût de la Construction (ICC) tracked new construction costs and was the only index used in French commercial leases until 2014. The Pinel Act removed it as the reference index for both the three-year review cap and the renewal rent cap, replacing it with the ILC and ILAT for leases concluded or renewed from 1 September 2014.
The ICC was not abolished for contractual indexation clauses. Older leases that still reference the ICC for their indexation mechanism are not automatically void. However, using the ICC for indexation when the ILC or ILAT will govern the three-year review creates a structural tension: if the ICC moves differently from the applicable review index, the tenant may be able to invoke the statutory review to push the rent down to the ILC/ILAT-capped level, even though ICC indexation has been pushing it up. The indexation index should be aligned with the review index to eliminate this arbitrage opportunity.
Indexation Clauses: The Permitted Index Menu
For a contractual indexation clause, Article L. 112-2 of the Code monétaire et financier defines which indices are lawful. An indexation clause may use:
- The ILC (commercial and artisanal activities);
- The ILAT (tertiary activities);
- The ICC (still permitted for indexation, though no longer used for reviews and renewals);
- Any index with a direct connection to the object of the lease or to the activity of one of the parties (e.g. an index tracking the cost of raw materials specific to the tenant’s trade);
- The general price level (CPI) — permitted under Article L. 112-3 for commercial, artisanal, and tertiary activities.
What is expressly prohibited is indexation based on the minimum wage (SMIC), on the general level of prices or wages generically, or on prices of goods or services with no direct connection to the lease.
Changing the Index During the Lease
A mid-lease change of the indexation index is a modification of the parties’ respective obligations. Under Art. L. 145-33 C. com., the parties’ obligations form part of the factors that determine rental market value. Changing the index could therefore constitute a notable modification of an element affecting rental value, which could in turn justify uncapping the renewal rent. This risk is frequently overlooked when tenants negotiate an index switch hoping for a more favourable trajectory. Mid-lease index changes should not be made without a thorough analysis of the renewal implications.
When the Index Is Void: Consequences and Prescription
An indexation clause specifying a prohibited index is unwritten as to the index choice. The sanction affects the clause itself, not the whole lease: the landlord cannot use the void clause to demand termination of the lease (Cass. 3e civ., 14 June 1983). Equally, an index clause in a three-year review context specifying a non-statutory index is unwritten under Art. L. 145-15 C. com.
The critical point on prescription: an action to have a clause declared unwritten is not subject to any limitation period (Cass. 3e civ., 19 November 2020; Cass. 3e civ., 16 November 2023). A tenant can challenge a void index clause at any time, including many years after the lease was signed, and claim repayment of any excess rent paid — subject to the five-year limitation period for the repayment claim itself (Cass. 3e civ., 30 June 2021, n° 19-23.038), running from the date of each overpayment.
Where a clause is declared void, courts have sometimes substituted a lawful index rather than simply striking the clause (Cass. 3e civ., 22 June 1987). However, the court cannot impose an index that was not agreed by the parties (Cass. com., 16 November 2004).
Include in the indexation clause a provision for index substitution: if the chosen index is declared void, ceases to be published, or becomes unavailable, specify the substitute index to be applied — or provide that a substitute will be agreed by the parties within a stated period, failing which it will be fixed by an expert appointed by the court at shared cost. This avoids the legal vacuum that arises when the primary index disappears and the parties cannot agree on a replacement.
Index selection errors are easy to make and expensive to correct — particularly given that challenges carry no limitation period. We advise on index selection, mid-lease index disputes, and the drafting of indexation clauses that hold up across the full lease term and at renewal.
Book a ConsultationLegal Notice. This article is for general information and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. Laws and regulations may have changed since publication. Always seek qualified French legal advice on index selection in a French commercial lease.
Key Legal References
Prohibited index types for indexation clauses: prohibition on indexation based on SMIC, general level of prices or wages, or prices of goods or services with no direct connection to the lease or parties’ activities
General price level (consumer price index) permitted as indexation reference for commercial, artisanal, and tertiary activities
ILC scope: applies to commercial and artisanal activities; weighted sum of consumer prices, new construction costs, and retail turnover
ILAT scope: applies to tertiary non-commercial activities (liberal professions, logistics warehouses, teaching activities); weighted sum of consumer prices, new construction costs, and GDP in value
Three-year review cap: only ILC or ILAT may be used; ICC removed for leases concluded or renewed from 1 September 2014
Renewal rent cap: only ILC or ILAT may be used; ICC removed for leases concluded or renewed from 1 September 2014
Void index clause: sanction affects the clause only, not the validity of the lease; landlord cannot use the void clause to demand termination
Action to have an indexation clause declared unwritten is not subject to any limitation period
Confirmation that action to declare an index clause unwritten carries no limitation period
Repayment of overpaid rent resulting from a void index clause: subject to a five-year limitation period running from the date of each payment
Court may substitute a lawful index where the contractual index is declared void, rather than simply striking the clause
Court cannot impose a substitute index that was not agreed by the parties
