Thus, the Court of Cassation ruled, the absence of railings in a building built decades ago is not a defect which would engage the responsibility of its owner vis-à-vis the tenant in the event of an accident. .
This characteristic is apparent, linked to the date of construction, and the tenant can see it when he visits the premises, the judges considered. They thus dismiss the argument of a tenant who had fallen through a window whose lower edge was less than 90 centimeters high and which had no railings.
This tenant argued that as a layman in the construction or housing business, he was incapable of noticing the danger. For him, this danger characterized an indecent accommodation and the owner was therefore responsible for his accident.
But the 2002 decree which requires owners to provide “decent” housing does not require the modernization of old buildings and the installation of current devices, explained the Court of Cassation. For the railings, this decree only imposes to maintain those which exist "in a state in conformity with their use". The age of the installation therefore does not characterize non-decent housing, observed the Court.
Currently, the construction and housing code requires a guardrail to be at least one meter high.
(Cass. Civil 3, 22.6.2022, K 21-10.512).