In Switzerland, the distinction between commercial and residential leases is a fundamental element of tenancy law. Although these two legal regimes share certain common features, they differ considerably in their application, protection and constraints. The Swiss legal framework, mainly governed by the Swiss Code of Obligations (CO), establishes specific rules for each type of contract, reflecting the distinct nature of the relationship between landlord and tenant according to the intended use of the property. This differentiation responds to the particular needs of economic players for commercial premises on the one hand, and to the protection of housing as a basic need on the other. A thorough understanding of these two regimes is essential for both landlords and tenants in order to exercise their rights and meet their obligations in the Swiss context.
The Swiss legal system governs rental relationships through a number of legislative texts whose hierarchy and articulation determine the rules applicable to the various types of lease. At the apex of this legal architecture is the Swiss Code of Obligations (CO), in particular articles 253 to 304, which constitute the common foundation applicable to all lease contracts. These general provisions are supplemented by theOrdinance on Leases of Residential and Commercial Premises (OBLF), which specifies the application of the CO.
For residential leases, the Swiss legislator has introduced a reinforced protection regime, recognizing housing as a fundamental need. This protection takes the form of specific provisions concerning rent increases, terminations and the tenant’s right to contest certain decisions made by the landlord. For commercial leases, on the other hand, the legal framework grants greater flexibility to the parties, based on the principle that economic players generally have a more balanced negotiating capacity.
A distinctive feature of Swiss law is the cantonal jurisdiction over procedural matters. While substantive tenancy law is federal, each canton determines its own procedural rules and designates the authorities competent to settle tenancy disputes. This federalist feature creates significant variations in the practical application of tenancy law from one canton to another.
Commercial leases in Switzerland benefit from a less restrictive framework than residential leases. The legislator considered that the parties to a commercial lease, generally professionals, could negotiate their contractual conditions with greater autonomy. Nevertheless, certain provisions of the Swiss Code of Obligations (CO) remain imperative even in this context.
The case law of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court has gradually defined what constitutes commercial premises. These are generally spaces intended for the exercise of an economic activity, whether industrial, craft, commercial or liberal. This classification entails the application of a distinct legal regime, particularly in terms of lease duration, termination and subletting.
Residential leases are subject to more protective rules for tenants. This reinforced protection is justified by the social dimension of housing and by the structural imbalance that can exist between lessors and lessees in the residential real estate market.
Swiss law provides for the following:
These protective mechanisms make the residential lease a highly regulated contract, where contractual freedom is significantly limited by considerations of social public policy.
One of the major differences between commercial and residential leases in Switzerland is the duration of the contract. For commercial leases, practice generally favors long-term contracts, often for 5 to 10 years, and sometimes longer. This preference for long commitments reflects the need for companies to amortize their development investments and benefit from the geographical stability essential to their business. Conversely, residential leases are frequently concluded for an indefinite term, offering tenants greater flexibility while guaranteeing them protection against unjustified termination.
When it comes to renewal, commercial leases often include renewal option clauses that allow the tenant to extend the lease for one or more additional periods under predetermined conditions. These options constitute a unilateral right of the tenant, and represent a considerable asset for the continuity of a commercial activity. In the case of residential leases, renewal is generally tacit if the lease is not terminated within the legal timeframe.
When it comes to termination, the differences are striking. In the case of a fixed-term commercial lease, there is no need to terminate the contract at the end of the agreed term, as the contract is automatically terminated unless otherwise stipulated. On the other hand, early termination is possible for just cause (art. 266g CO) or if provided for in a specific clause. In the case of a residential lease, even for a fixed term, Swiss law offers the tenant the possibility of contesting termination if it contravenes the rules of good faith (art. 271 CO).
Notice periods vary considerably between the two types of lease. For open-ended commercial leases, the statutory period is six months (art. 266c CO), but the parties frequently agree on longer periods. For residential leases, the standard period is three months (art. 266c CO), with deadlines traditionally set at the usual local terms (often March 31, June 30, September 30 and December 31).
The formalities for termination are rigorous under Swiss law. Notice of termination must be given in writing, generally on an official form for residential leases. This essential formality is designed to inform the tenant of his or her rights, in particular the right to contest the notice or request an extension of the lease.
Protection against termination reveals a notable asymmetry between the two regimes. For residential leases, the tenant benefits from extensive protection:
For commercial leases, this protection is considerably reduced. While the tenant can always invoke abuse of rights (art. 2 of the Swiss Civil Code), case law rarely recognizes the abusive nature of a commercial lease termination. Judicial extension is still possible, but limited to a maximum duration of 6 years (art. 272b CO), and courts are generally more restrictive in granting it for commercial premises.
The rent-setting system in Switzerland varies considerably depending on whether the lease is for commercial or residential use. For commercial leases, the principle of contractual freedom largely prevails. The parties are free to determine the initial rent, without being bound by references to the previous rent or comparative rents. This freedom extends to rent indexation mechanisms, with the possibility of automatic adjustments based on the Swiss consumer price index (CPI) or other contractually agreed parameters.
In the case of residential leases, the setting of the initial rent and subsequent changes are strictly regulated by law. The initial rent may be contested if it gives rise to an excessive return, or if it results from a manifestly exaggerated purchase price (art. 269 CO). This must be done within 30 days of taking possession of the property. In cantons where there is a housing shortage, the lessor is required to use the official form to communicate the initial rent.
Rent increases follow different rules depending on the type of lease. For commercial premises, the parties can agree on several adjustment mechanisms:
For housing, rent increases are subject to restrictive conditions:
The allocation of expenses is another area where the differences between commercial and residential leases are significant. In practice, commercial leases allow considerable latitude in defining the ancillary costs to be borne by the tenant. In so-called “triple net” or “net rent” leases, it is common for the tenant to assume all building operating expenses, and even certain maintenance costs.
In the case of residential property, article 257a of the Swiss Code of Obligations (CO) and OBLF strictly limit the ancillary costs that can be charged to the tenant. Only costs incurred by the use of the rented property (heating, hot water, etc.) may be passed on, and then only if they are expressly mentioned in the contract. In principle, maintenance and repair costs remain the responsibility of the lessor.
Rental guarantees also have different regimes. For residential leases, the guarantee is capped at three months’ net rent (art. 257e CO) and must be deposited in a blocked bank account in the tenant’s name. For commercial leases, there is no legal limit on the amount of the guarantee, and the terms and conditions of its deposit are freely negotiable. In practice, these guarantees can range from six to twelve months’ rent, and take various forms: cash deposit, bank guarantee, surety bond or rent guarantee insurance.
The division of responsibility for interior fittings, maintenance and renovation is a fundamental aspect distinguishing commercial leases from residential leases in Switzerland. In the case of commercial premises, contractual practice generally allows tenants a great deal of latitude when it comes to interior fittings. This latitude is explained by the need to adapt spaces to the specific needs of the business in question. The commercial tenant can therefore carry out major conversion work, subject to the prior agreement of the lessor and compliance with building regulations.
In this context, commercial lease contracts often specify the terms and conditions for returning the premises at the end of the lease. Two options generally prevail: either the lessee undertakes to return the premises to their original condition, implying the dismantling of specific fixtures and fittings; or he may leave the fixtures and fittings in place, with or without compensation depending on their residual value and usefulness to the lessor or a future lessee.
For residential leases, the framework is more restrictive. The tenant may only carry out minor alterations without the landlord’s consent. Substantial alterations (knocking down partitions, changing sanitary installations, etc.) require the landlord’s written authorization, in accordance with article 260a of the Swiss Code of Obligations. In practice, residential landlords are generally more reluctant to authorize major alterations.
When it comes to routine maintenance, Swiss law makes a clear distinction between minor repairs that are the responsibility of the tenant (art. 259 CO) and more substantial repairs that are the responsibility of the landlord. For residential properties, this division is generally interpreted strictly by the courts, limiting the tenant’s obligations to minor repairs of modest cost (replacing light bulbs, unclogging sinks, etc.).
In the case of commercial leases, contractual practice tends to considerably broaden the scope of the tenant’s maintenance obligations. It is not uncommon for contracts to stipulate that the tenant is responsible for all interior maintenance, and even for certain aspects of exterior maintenance or technical installations. However, this distribution of responsibilities must be expressly stipulated in the contract.
Commercial lease contracts frequently include clauses on the maintenance of specific installations (air conditioning, security systems, elevators), requiring tenants to sign and finance maintenance contracts with approved service providers.
The question of major renovations also reveals significant differences. For residential leases, the lessor must comply with strict rules when undertaking renovation work likely to disrupt the use of the dwelling:
In the case of commercial leases, contracts generally contain specific provisions concerning renovation work, often giving the lessor greater leeway. Nevertheless, commercial tenants can negotiate protective clauses, notably concerning the continued accessibility of their business or the visibility of their sign during the renovation work.
Case law also recognizes that the work must not excessively compromise the exercise of commercial activity. In certain cases, compensation for loss of sales may be awarded if the work causes abnormal harm that exceeds the usually tolerable inconvenience.
The rules governing subletting and lease transfers are a perfect illustration of the divergent approaches adopted by the Swiss legislator with regard to commercial and residential leases. In the case of residential leases, article 262 of the Swiss Code of Obligations establishes a relatively broad right to sublet. The tenant may sublet all or part of the dwelling subject to three cumulative conditions: obtaining the lessor’s consent, not applying abusive conditions, and not creating major inconveniences for the lessor. Consent may only be withheld on specific and legitimate grounds, and the lessor must demonstrate that one of the above conditions has not been met.
In the case of commercial leases, however, contractual practice often considerably limits this right. Lessors frequently insert restrictive, even prohibitive, clauses concerning the subletting of commercial premises. These restrictions are justified by the importance of the lessee’s identity in the commercial relationship, particularly in terms of solvency, reputation and suitability of the activity carried out with the destination of the building or the lessor’s commercial strategy.
Lease transfers present even more marked differences. For commercial leases, article 263 of the Swiss Code of Obligations (CO) provides for a specific system enabling tenants to transfer their lease to a third party taking over their trade or business. This mechanism, designed to facilitate the transfer of businesses, represents a significant departure from the principle that contracts can only be transferred with the agreement of both parties. The lessor can only object to the transfer for “just cause”, a concept interpreted restrictively by case law.
There is no equivalent provision for residential leases. The tenant may not transfer his lease to a third party without the express agreement of the lessor, who has complete freedom to refuse such a transfer.
These differences give rise to specific contractual strategies. In commercial leases, the parties often negotiate detailed clauses concerning..:
In the case of residential leases, the issues at stake focus more on the duration and financial terms of the sublease, as well as on guarantees of proper use of the premises by the sublessee. A vigilant landlord will want to ensure that the sublease does not conceal a disguised transfer of the main lease.
The case law of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court has clarified several aspects of these regimes. With regard to commercial leases, it has established that:
For residential leases, the courts have specified that:
The coexistence of two distinct regimes for commercial and residential leases in Switzerland has considerable practical implications for all players in the real estate market. For institutional owners managing mixed portfolios, this duality imposes differentiated management depending on the nature of the property, with specific administrative processes, contractual models and valuation strategies. Investors must integrate these differences into their return analyses, as the increased rigidity of the regulatory framework for residential leases has a direct impact on the valuation of residential properties compared with commercial assets.
As far as lessees are concerned, awareness of these differences is crucial to the effective exercise of their rights. Corporate tenants need to pay particular attention to clauses relating to duration, extension possibilities and early exit terms, as these elements can have a significant impact on their business plans. Residential tenants, on the other hand, benefit from substantial protections that they need to be aware of in order to invoke them opportunely.
The complexity of Swiss tenancy law inevitably generates disputes, the resolution of which follows distinct procedural paths depending on the nature of the lease. In the majority of cantons, the conciliation authorities are the first compulsory level for rental disputes. These joint bodies, made up of landlord and tenant representatives under the chairmanship of a legal expert, manage to resolve a significant proportion of disputes without recourse to the courts.
Disputes relating to residential leases generally benefit from a simplified and accelerated procedure, reflecting the legislator’s desire to facilitate access to justice for tenants. The main features of this procedure include:
For commercial leases, particularly those involving large sums, the ordinary procedure applies more frequently. This is characterized by:
This procedural differentiation reflects the legislator’s view that commercial players generally have the resources and skills to take on a more formalized procedure.
Faced with the complexity and potential cost of legal proceedings, parties to commercial leases are increasingly turning to alternative dispute resolution methods. Mediation and arbitration offer significant advantages in this context:
These alternative mechanisms are particularly relevant to complex disputes involving sophisticated technical or financial aspects, such as the determination of variable rents based on sales or the valuation of specific development work.
In complex disputes involving technical aspects or significant sums of money, the involvement of a specialized law firm can prove decisive. Lawyers familiar with the subtleties of commercial and residential lease law will be able to devise strategies tailored to the specific nature of the contract concerned, maximizing the chances of obtaining a favorable resolution.
Developments in Swiss case law on leases reveal some notable trends. In the case of commercial leases, the courts have recently clarified..:
With regard to residential leases, recent developments in case law include the following:
In-depth knowledge of these developments in case law is a major asset when it comes to anticipating the likely outcome of a dispute and devising an appropriate strategy, whether to negotiate an out-of-court settlement or prepare for legal action.
An initial consultation
from 60 min to CHF 220.00
Take stock of your situation with a specialist lawyer.
Would you just like to make an appointment to ask a few questions?
Not sure what to do?
Is your situation unclear?
Opt for an initial consultation with a lawyer.
You will then decide whether you wish to proceed, and our lawyers will give you the cost of the procedure according to your case. Appointments can be made in person or by videoconference.
by calling our secretariat or filling in the form below.
Appointments in person or by videoconference.
© All rights reserved – Reproduction prohibited – 2025 – Legal Notice