Lessor's Liability for Minor Repairs to Leased Property: An Analysis and Critique of Judicial Precedents with Emphasis on Iranian, French, and Imami Jurisprudence

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Ph.D. in Private Law, Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran

Abstract

Introduction
Responsibility for repairs in lease agreements, particularly minor repairs, has long been a challenging issue in the legal relationship between landlords and tenants. In the Iranian legal system, this issue has created ambiguity, with some legal scholars and most courts citing Article 20 of the Landlord-Tenant Relations Act of 1977 to hold the tenant responsible for minor repairs. The objective of this research is to conduct a comparative analysis of the responsibility for minor repairs in Iranian and French law, with the aim of clarifying the correct legal perspective and proposing a solution. This study seeks to determine whether this view is compatible with the fundamental legal principles and jurisprudential theories governing the Iranian legal system and how a revision of judicial precedent can lead to greater clarity and fairness in lease relationships.
 
Methods
This research employs an analytical-comparative approach. Initially, relevant legal provisions in Iranian law, including the Civil Code (specifically Articles 477 to 486) and the special Landlord-Tenant Relations Acts of 1977 and 1997, were examined. Subsequently, the Shi'a jurisprudential foundations concerning lease contracts and repair responsibilities were analyzed, drawing upon the opinions of jurists such as Sahib Jawahir, Allamah Hilli, and Shahid Thani, to articulate the principles governing this contractual relationship. For comparison, the French legal system, as a prominent system in the field of leasing, was studied. The French Civil Code and special laws like the 1989 Act and the 1987 Decree were meticulously reviewed, and relevant judicial precedents from both countries were analyzed to extract the reasoning and basis of court decisions. This integrated methodology allowed for a deep comparative analysis and the extraction of substantive differences and similarities between the two legal systems, enabling the researchers to present a well-founded critique of the current judicial practice in Iran.
 
Results and Discussion
The research findings indicate that in Iranian law, legal and jurisprudential principles explicitly assign the responsibility for all necessary repairs for the enjoyment of the property to the landlord, unless the damage is a result of the tenant's negligence or misconduct. The reliance on articles such as 486 of the Civil Code, which states that "all expenses necessary for the possibility of enjoyment" are the owner's responsibility, and jurisprudential principles like "the cost of maintaining any property is the responsibility of its owner," and "the one who gains profits must bear the losses," all support this view. Furthermore, the fiduciary nature of the tenant's possession in Iranian law exempts them from paying for costs that are not a result of their fault. On the other hand, it was found that the requirement for the tenant to perform minor repairs in the 1977 Landlord-Tenant Relations Act was justifiable within the specific legal context of that law, in exchange for privileges such as "goodwill rights." Extending this obligation to current contracts governed by the 1997 Act lacks a valid legal basis. In contrast, an examination of French law revealed that this legal system, by adopting a different approach, explicitly and mandatorily assigns the responsibility for minor repairs to the tenant. This French approach is justified by principles such as the tenant's liability for damages resulting from normal use and the requirement for the tenant to have liability insurance. This fundamental difference in legal principles shows that imposing the costs of minor repairs on the tenant in the Iranian legal system is inconsistent with its domestic legal and jurisprudential principles. 
 
Conclusion
In conclusion, this research finds that the current judicial practice in Iran, which holds the tenant responsible for minor repairs, requires serious reconsideration. Based on a thorough analysis of laws and jurisprudential principles, the fundamental premise is that the financial responsibility for all repairs, both major and minor (provided they are not due to the tenant's negligence or misconduct), lies with the landlord. To address the practical challenges arising from this responsibility, it is proposed that while the cost of these repairs remains the landlord's burden, the actual work can be carried out by the tenant, with the expenses deducted from the rent. This approach not only aligns with Iran's legal and jurisprudential principles but can also significantly contribute to clarity and fairness in lease relationships and prevent multiple litigations in courts.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

References
Abhari, H., & Zarei, R. (2015). Determining the Governing Law for Eviction Claims of Commercial Premises. Journal of Legal Studies, 7(1), 1-27. DOI: 10.22099/JLS.2015.3044 [In Persian]
Alizadeh Kharazi, M. M. (2009). Analytical Review of Economic Relations between Landlord and Tenant. Tehran: Mizan Publications. [In Persian]
Amid, H. (2010). Amid Persian Dictionary. Tehran: Rah-e Roshd Publications. [In Persian]
Anvari, H. (2002). The Great Dictionary of Sokhan. Vol. 3. Tehran: Sokhan Publications. [In Persian]
Ardabili, A. B. M. (n.d.). Majma’ al-Fā’idah wa al-Barrhān fī Sharh Irshād al-Adhhān. Vol. 10. Qom: Islamic Publishing Institute. [In Arabic]
Bagheri, A. (2005). Civil Jurisprudence: Transfer Contracts: Sale and Lease. Tehran: Samt Publications. [In Persian]
Bahramee, Z. (2008). Goodwill/Key Money; Right to Business, Occupation, or Trade. Tehran: Binezh Publications. [In Persian]
Falah, M. R. (2009). Establishment and Proof in the Landlord-Tenant Relations Act of 1977. Tehran: Jangal Publications. [In Persian]
Gorlier, V. (2021). “Fiche 15. Les obligations du locataire,” in Droit des contrats spéciaux.
Habibi, M. (2016). Analytical Review of Regulations and Bylaws Related to Landlords and Tenants in Residential and Commercial Premises from the Perspective of Official Judiciary Experts. Tehran: Center for Expert Research Publications. [In Persian]
Hassani Ameli (Shahid Thani), Z. B. A. (1985). Mabāḥith Huqūqī Sharḥ Lum’ah. Edited by Asadollah Lotfi. Tehran: Majd Publications. [In Arabic]
Hassani Ameli (Shahid Thani), Z. B. A. (1990). Al-Rawḍah al-Bahiyyah fī Sharḥ al-Lum’ah al-Dimashqiyyah. Vol. 4. Qom: Davari Library. [In Arabic]
Hassani Ameli (Shahid Thani), Z. B. A. (1993). Masālik al-Afhām ilá Tanqīḥ Sharā’i’ al-Islām. Vol. 5. Qom: Islamic Knowledge Institute. [In Arabic]
Hassini, S. M. R. (2007). Landlord and Tenant Relations in the 1977 and 1977 Acts in Judicial Practice. Tehran: Binezh Publications. [In Persian]
Hakīm, M. (1995). Mustamsik al-‘Urwah al-Wuthqā. Vol. 12. Qom: Dar al-Tafsir. [In Arabic]
Hilli (Allamah), H. B. Y. (1995). Mukhtalaf al-Shi’ah fī Aḥkām al-Sharī’ah. Vol. 6. Qom: Islamic Publishing Institute. [In Arabic]
Hilli (Allamah), H. B. Y. (1999). Taḥrīr al-Aḥkām al-Shar’īyah ‘alá Madhhab al-Imāmīyah. Vol. 3. Qom: Imam Sadiq Institute (AS). [In Arabic]
Hilli (Allamah), H. B. Y. (n.d.). Tadhkirat al-Fuqahā’ (Old Edition). Vol. 2. Tehran: Murtadawiyyah Library. [In Arabic]
Hilli (Muhaqqiq), J. B. H. (1988). Sharā’i’ al-Islām fī Masā’il al-Ḥalāl wa al-Ḥarām. Vol. 2. Qom: Isma’iliyan. [In Arabic]
Isfahani, M. H. (1409 AH). Buḥūth fī al-Fiqh (Isfahani) (Al-Ijārah). Qom: Islamic Publishing Institute. [In Arabic]
Javanmard, L. (2011). Comparison of Goodwill/Key Money and Business/Trade Right in Iranian Law. Master’s Thesis, Advisor: Hassan Badini. University of Tehran. [In Persian]
Javanmard, L., & Rahpeyma, S. (2018). Protection of Tenant’s Business Goodwill in Iranian, Islamic, and French Law. Quarterly Journal of Comparative Studies of Islamic and Western Law, 5(4), 29-56. DoI: 10.22091/CSIW.2019.3798.1479 [In Persian]
Javanmard, L., & Rahpeyma, S. (2021). Priority of Tenant’s Goodwill Payment over Eviction in Iranian, Islamic, and French Law. Quarterly Journal of Comparative Studies of Islamic and Western Law, 6(3), 33-64. DoI: 10.22091/CSIW.2021.4741.1643 [In Persian]
Javanmard, L., & Rahpeyma, S. (2022). The Right to Business Reputation in Iranian Law with a Comparative Study in English Law. Biannual Scientific Journal of Comparative Law, 9(2), 7-36. DoI: 10.22096/LAW.2024.2015739.2182 [In Persian]
Katouzian, N. (1999). Civil Law: Course on Specified Contracts. Vol. 1. Tehran: Sahami Enteshar Co. [In Persian]
Katouzian, N. (2002). Philosophy of Law. Vol. 3. Tehran: Sahami Enteshar Co. [In Persian]
Katouzian, N. (2005). Civil Code in the Current Legal Order. Tehran: Mizan Publications. [In Persian]
Kashani (Faydh), M. B. S. M. (2016). Mafātīḥ al-Sharā’i’. Vol. 2. Shahid Motahhari Higher School. [In Arabic]
Keshavarz, B. (2005). Analytical Review of the New Landlord and Tenant Relations Act of 1997. Tehran: Keshavarz Publications. [In Persian]
Khui, S. A. (1997). Mawsu’at al-Imām al-Khu’ī. Vol. 30. Qom: Imam Al-Khu’i Heritage Revival Institute. [In Arabic]
Le Bourg, J. (2019). “La formation du contrat de bail,” in Fiches de Droit des contrats spéciaux.
Maimi, L., & Parronchi, F. (2008). “Annexe 1. Les obligations légales du contrat de bail,” in Fonction: Responsable des services généraux: Organiser, Optimiser, Manager.
Mousavi El-Khalkhali, M. M. (2006). Fiqh al-Shī’ah (Al-Ijārah). Tehran: Munir Cultural and Publishing Center. [In Arabic]
Mousavi El-Sabzevari, A. A. (1993). Muhadhdhab al-Aḥkām fī Bayān al-Ḥalāl wa al-Ḥarām. Vol. 19. Qom: Self-Published. [In Arabic]
Mughniyah, M. J. (2000). Fiqh al-Imām Ja’far al-Ṣādiq. Vol. 4. Qom: Ansarian. [In Arabic]
Najafi (Ṣāḥib al-Jawāhir), M. H. B. B. (1999). Jawāhir al-Kalām (Modern Edition). Vols. 14 and 23. Qom: Islamic Jurisprudence Encyclopedia Institute. [In Arabic]
Qara’i, M. A. (1995). Al-Mu’allaqāt ‘alá al-‘Urwah al-Wuthqā. Vol. 4. Qom: Towhid. [In Arabic]
Qomi, M. K. B. A. (1992). Ḥāshiyat al-Makāsib. Vol. 2. Qom: Isma’iliyan. [In Arabic]
Qomi, M. K. B. A. (1989). Al-'Urwah al-Wuthqā (A’lām al-'Aṣr). Vol. 2. Beirut: Al-A’lami Publications. [In Arabic]
Qomi, M. K. B. A. (1999). Al-'Urwah al-Wuthqā. Vol. 5. Qom: Islamic Publishing Institute. [In Arabic]
Qomi, M. K. B. A. (2000). Al-'Urwah al-Wuthqā (Lankrani). Vol. 2. Qom: Imam Sadiq Institute (AS). [In Arabic]
Qomi, A. B. M. H. (1992). Jāmi’ al-Shattāt. Vol. 3. Tehran: Keyhan. [In Arabic]
Safaei, S. H., & Emami, A. (2019). Essentials of Family Law. Tehran: Mizan Publications. [In Persian]
Shahrokhi, S. N., & Rahimi, H. B. (2021). Examining the Principle of Compensation for All Damages in Terms of Consistency with Monist Foundations in the Field of Civil Liability Philosophy. Journal of Legal Studies, 13(2), 147-181. DoI: 10.22099/JLS.2021.36646.3824 [In Persian]
Shahrokhi, S. N., & Rahimi, H. B. (2023). The Concept of the Principle of Compensation for All Damages and the Study of its Negation in Pluralist Theories of Civil Liability Law. Journal of Legal Studies, 15(4), 95-133. DoI: 10.22099/JLS.2023.43255.4686 [In Persian]
Shahroudi, M. H. (2008). Kitāb al-Ijārah. Vol. 1. Qom: Islamic Jurisprudence Encyclopedia Institute. [In Arabic]
Soleimani, A. K. (2009). Legal Rules from Jurisprudence. Qom: Bustan Ketab Qom. [In Persian]
Tabatabai El-Qomi, T. (2002). Al-Ghāyah al-Quṣwā fī al-Ta’līq ‘alá al-‘Urwah al-Wuthqā (Al-Ijārah). Qom: Mahallati. [In Arabic]
Ubdipour Fard, E. (2019). Analytical Topics in Commercial Law. Qom: Research Institute of Hawza and University. [In Persian]
Zaynali, M. (2009). Goodwill/Key Money and Business Right in Iranian Law. Tehran: Jangal Publications. [In Persian]
 
 
Court Decisions
Judiciary Research Institute. (2013). “Changing Occupation and Alteration in the Leased Property.” Final Ruling No. 9409970908300843. Viewed: 2025-07-05 on: https://ara.jri.ac.ir/Judge/Text/30004. [In Persian]
Judiciary Research Institute. (2013). “Claiming Costs of Repairs in the Leased Property Without Lessor’s Consent.” Legal Ruling No. 9309970270400060. Viewed: 2025-07-05 on: https://ara.jri.ac.ir/Judge/Text/6511. [In Persian]
Judiciary Research Institute. (2013). “Examples of Minor Repairs in the Leased Property.” Final Ruling No. 9309970221000977. Viewed: 2025-07-05 on: https://ara.jri.ac.ir/Judge/Text/10075. [In Persian]
Judiciary Research Institute. (2012). “Limits of Lessor and Lessee Responsibility in Paying Costs of the Leased Property.” Final Ruling No. 9209970220601093. Viewed: 2025-07-05 on: https://ara.jri.ac.ir/Judge/Text/4988. [In Persian]
Cour de cassation, 3e chambre civile, du 11 mai 2006, 04-18.490. (online) at: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/juri/id/JURITEXT000007025185. [In French]
Cour de cassation, 3e chambre civile, du 15 mai 2013, 12-16.140. (online) at: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/juri/id/JURITEXT000027429188. [In French]
Cour de cassation, 3e chambre civile, du 14 mars 2019, 18-10.741. (online) at: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/juri/id/JURITEXT000038287313. [In French]
 
Laws, Codes, and Regulations
Code civil (French Civil Code). (online) at: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/LEGITEXT000006066148/. [In French]
Code civil (French Civil Code). (online) at: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/LEGITEXT000006066148/. [In French]
Code de procédure civile (French Code of Civil Procedure). (online) at: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/LEGITEXT000006069108/. [In French]
Code de procédure civile (French Code of Civil Procedure). (online) at: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/LEGITEXT000006069108/. [In French]
Décret n°87-712 du 26 août 1987. (online) at: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/JORFTEXT000000803525. [In French]
Loi n° 89-462 du 6 juillet 1989. (online) at: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/JORFTEXT000000874247/. [In French]
Loi n° 89-462 du 6 juillet 1989. (online) at: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/JORFTEXT000000874247/. [In French]
Qudrat-e Qazaiyieh Secretariat (2009). Judicial Practice of Iran in Relation to Civil Courts. Vol. 10. Tehran: Jangal Publications. [In Persian]
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/article_lc/LEGIARTI000006491816. [In French]
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/article_lc/LEGIARTI000006491827. [In French]
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/article_lc/LEGIARTI000043977105. [In French]
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/article_lc/LEGIARTI000047900014. [In French]
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/LEGIARTI000020440368/2009-03-28/. [In French]
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/LEGIARTI000020440368/2009-03-28/. [In French]
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000006442784/2021-10-03. [In French]
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000006442784/2021-10-03. [In French]
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000006442892/2021-12-06. [In French]
 
Journal of Legal Studies
Volume 18, Issue 3 - Serial Number 58
October 2026
Pages 351-396

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics