In Switzerland, the eviction of a tenant is the last resort in a tenancy dispute, governed by strict legal provisions. This process can only be initiated after a series of formal steps and under certain precise conditions. Swiss tenancy law, renowned for its protection of tenants, strikes a delicate balance between the rights of landlords and those of occupants. Every year, thousands of procedures are initiated, but not all result in actual eviction. The main causes are non-payment of rent, serious breach of contract or the landlord’s need to recover his property. The procedure involves the judicial authorities, bailiffs and sometimes the police, within a framework strictly regulated by the Code of Obligations and cantonal laws.
The Swiss legal system provides a rigorous framework for tenant eviction procedures, striking a balance between tenant protection and the legitimate rights of landlords. These regulations are based on several fundamental pillars that structure the entire process.
The Swiss Code of Obligations (CO), in particular articles 257 to 274, is the main legal basis for tenancy law. Article 257d CO is of particular importance as it defines the procedure in the event of late payment of rent, a frequent reason for eviction. According to this provision, the landlord may terminate the lease with a minimum notice period of 30 days to the end of a month if the tenant, after receiving a written warning granting a 30-day payment deadline, still fails to meet his obligations.
At the same time, the Federal Law on Debt Collection and Bankruptcy (LP) plays a decisive role in the eviction procedure, particularly through its articles on forced execution. This law defines the practical means by which the landlord can obtain the effective eviction of a recalcitrant tenant.
It should be emphasized that Switzerland’s federalist system gives cantonal legislation a substantial role in the application of expulsion procedures. Each canton has its own regulations and authorities competent to deal with these issues. In Geneva, for example, the Conciliation Commission for Leases and Rents is required to intervene prior to any legal proceedings, while in the canton of Vaud, it is the Tribunal des Baux that decides on disputes.
The Swiss Federal Constitution indirectly guarantees protection against arbitrary expulsion, through Article 13 on the right to respect for private and family life. This protection is reinforced by Switzerland’s international commitments, notably the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), Article 8 of which protects the right to respect for the home.
The jurisprudence of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court has gradually refined the interpretation of the legal provisions governing expulsions. Several landmark rulings have established that expulsion can only be ordered as a last resort, and that the authorities must take into account the proportionality of the measure, particularly when vulnerable people are involved.
This legal framework reflects the Swiss legislator’s determination to consider housing as a fundamental asset requiring special protection, while recognizing the legitimate rights of owners to dispose of their property in certain precisely defined circumstances.
Under Swiss law, a tenant can only be evicted for specific, legally recognized reasons. These reasons are strictly defined to ensure a balance between the interests of landlords and the protection of tenants’ housing.
Non-payment of rent is the main cause of eviction proceedings in Switzerland. According to article 257d of the Swiss Code of Obligations, if a tenant is in arrears with the payment of rent or ancillary costs, the landlord may give him 30 days’ written notice to settle his debt. In this notice, the lessor must clearly state that failure to pay within this period will result in termination of the contract. If the lessee fails to pay within the stipulated period, the lessor may terminate the contract with 30 days’ notice to the end of the month.
It is noteworthy that case law has clarified that a one-off or minor delay does not necessarily justify extraordinary termination. Courts often examine the tenant’s previous behavior and the seriousness of the breach before validating an eviction on this ground.
Significant breaches of contractual obligations may justify eviction. Article 257f of the Swiss Code of Obligations stipulates that if, despite a written protest from the landlord, the tenant persists in breaching his duty of care or showing a lack of consideration for neighbors, the landlord may terminate the contract with a minimum of 30 days’ notice to the end of the month.
Violations deemed sufficiently serious include :
A landlord may terminate a lease by ordinary means, respecting the contractual or legal notice periods. Such termination need not be justified, but it must not be abusive. However, the tenant may contest the termination if he or she believes it contravenes the rules of good faith.
The lessor’s own urgent need is a recognized reason. This may include the lessor’s intention to occupy the dwelling personally, to house close family members, or to carry out major renovation work requiring evacuation of the premises. The courts generally require that this need be real, concrete and present, and not merely hypothetical or future.
Tenant bankruptcy may result in early termination of the lease. Under article 266h of the Swiss Code of Obligations, if a tenant is declared bankrupt after the contract has been concluded, the lessor may demand security for future rental payments. If such security is not provided within a reasonable time, the lessor may terminate the contract with immediate effect.
These different legitimate grounds for eviction reflect the Swiss legislator’s search for a balance between protecting housing as a fundamental right and safeguarding the legitimate interests of landlords. In all cases, the final assessment lies with the judicial authorities, who examine each situation in the light of the particular circumstances and the principle of proportionality.
The eviction procedure in Switzerland follows a rigorous formal path, involving several mandatory stages before the physical eviction of a tenant can be carried out. This procedure offers tenants various procedural guarantees and possibilities of appeal.
Before taking any legal action, the landlord must send the tenant a formal notice of default. In the case of non-payment, this formal notice must allow 30 days to settle the arrears, and explicitly state that failure to pay within this period will result in termination of the lease. For other contractual breaches, the lessor must also send a written warning specifying the alleged breaches and demanding their cessation.
If the tenant fails to remedy the situation within the stipulated period, the lessor may then give notice of extraordinary termination of the lease, using the official form prescribed by cantonal law. This notification must comply scrupulously with the formal requirements, failing which it will be null and void.
The tenant has 30 days from receipt of the notice to contest it with the competentconciliation authority. This objection may be based on a number of grounds, including the fact that the notice is unfair or that formal conditions have not been met.
Proceedings before the conciliation authority are compulsory and a prerequisite for any legal action. During this phase, the authority attempts to reach an agreement between the parties. If the conciliation is successful, the agreement is recorded in minutes which have the force of an enforceable judgment. In the event of failure, the authority issues an authorization to proceed, enabling the matter to be referred to the competent court.
If conciliation fails, the landlord may bring an action for validation of the notice and eviction before the competent court, generally the leasing court or the court of first instance, depending on the canton. The procedure follows the rules of the Swiss Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).
The court examines the legality of the notice and, if it deems it valid, orders the tenant’s eviction, setting a deadline for leaving the premises. In certain cases, the court may grant a lease extension of up to four years for residential leases, if eviction would entail particularly distressing consequences for the tenant without being justified by the lessor’s interests.
If the tenant fails to vacate the premises voluntarily after the eviction order has been issued, the landlord must apply forcompulsory execution to the competent authority, usually the debt enforcement office or the cantonal eviction service. This authority sets an eviction date and notifies the tenant.
Depending on the amount in dispute and the applicable cantonal provisions, the tenant may appeal against the eviction order. These appeals do not generally have an automatic suspensive effect on the execution of the eviction, but the tenant may request one.
On the day of eviction, public officials evacuate the tenant and his belongings. If necessary, they may request the assistance of the police. The tenant’s belongings are inventoried and stored at the tenant’s expense for a specified period.
This formal procedure, with its multiple stages and guarantees, reflects the Swiss legislator’s desire to protect the right to housing while ensuring the enforcement of court rulings. It offers tenants numerous opportunities to regularize their situation or negotiate alternatives to eviction, while enabling landlords to assert their legitimate rights within a strictly regulated framework.
The eviction of a tenant is not just a legal procedure, but a phenomenon with considerable social repercussions. In Switzerland, despite a protective legal framework, evictions affect thousands of households every year, with consequences that go far beyond the mere loss of a home.
The forced loss of a home often leads to a cascade of negative effects on those affected. Studies carried out by the Federal Housing Office show that evictions can lead to a rapid deterioration in the socio-economic situation of affected households. Finding a new home is particularly difficult after an eviction, as a history of unpaid rent is a major obstacle in an already tight housing market in Switzerland’s major conurbations.
Evictions disproportionately affect certain social groups. Cantonal statistics reveal that single-parent families, people on low incomes and migrants are over-represented in forced eviction procedures. This underlines the social dimension of the problem and its close link with other forms of precariousness.
Faced with these challenges, the Swiss cantons have developed various preventive mechanisms aimed at avoiding evictions whenever possible. The canton of Geneva has set up an Eviction Risk Assessment Commission, which intervenes upstream of eviction procedures. In Zurich, the “Wohnhilfe” program offers personalized support to tenants in difficulty, and can act as guarantor for landlords.
Cantonal social services play a central role in this preventive mechanism. They often offer one-off financial assistance to prevent rent arrears from accumulating. In the canton of Vaud, for example, the Fonds de solidarité pour le logement (housing solidarity fund) can intervene to settle rental debts and prevent lease termination.
Some cantons, such as Basel-Stadt, have instituted anearly warning system: courts are required to inform social services as soon as eviction proceedings are initiated, enabling rapid intervention with the households concerned.
Tenant associations such as ASLOCA play a key role in preventing evictions. They offer free or low-cost legal advice, assist tenants with administrative formalities and mediate with landlords.
Other charities, such as Caritas and the Salvation Army, complement this scheme by offering emergency housing and social support to people threatened with eviction or recently evicted.
The effectiveness of these preventive measures varies considerably from canton to canton, reflecting disparities in social policies and allocated resources. Urban cantons tend to have more developed systems than rural areas, creating territorial inequalities in access to preventive aid.
Nevertheless, these initiatives are indicative of a growing awareness on the part of the Swiss authorities of the importance of tackling the problem of evictions not just from a legal angle, but from a broader social perspective. Early intervention and personalized support appear to be the most promising approaches to reducing the number of actual evictions, while preserving the legitimate rights of landlords.
The issue of rental evictions in Switzerland is undergoing significant change, influenced by socio-economic developments, transformations in the real estate market and changes in the authorities’ approach. These developments raise new issues, while at the same time opening up avenues for improving existing practices.
The shortage of affordable housing in Switzerland’s urban centers is exacerbating the issues surrounding evictions. With extremely low vacancy rates in cities such as Geneva (0.51% in 2023), Zurich and Lausanne, evicted tenants face major difficulties in finding alternative accommodation. This situation puts additional pressure on the courts, which have to weigh up the social consequences of their eviction decisions even more carefully.
Data from the Swiss Federal Statistical Office show that rents have risen by more than 15% on average over the past decade, while wages have not kept pace. This disparity increases the risk of rent arrears and, consequently, of economic evictions. The courts are reporting an increase in eviction cases linked to financial difficulties, even among middle-class households.
The jurisprudence of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court has undergone significant changes in recent years, with a tendency to reinforce protection against abusive eviction. Several recent rulings have clarified the conditions under which a lease extension must be granted when the tenant is in a precarious situation, particularly when children are involved (ATF 142 III 336).
At the same time, alternative practices are emerging to avoid traumatic evictions. Some cantons are experimenting with enhanced mediation approaches, in which specialized professionals act as intermediaries between landlords and tenants in difficulty. The canton of Vaud, for example, has set up a tenant mediation unit which intervenes before the litigation phase, with encouraging results (70% of situations resolved without recourse to eviction).
The digitization of legal procedures is now extending to the eviction process. Several cantons have developed electronic platforms to track the progress of cases and facilitate communication between parties. However, this development raises questions about the protection of tenants’ personal data and the accessibility of procedures for people unfamiliar with digital tools.
The emergence of tenant blacklists is a worrying phenomenon. Although their legality is disputed, these informal databases shared between landlords considerably complicate the rehousing of people who have been the subject of eviction proceedings. The Federal Data Protection Commissioner has expressed reservations about these practices, but their often informal nature makes it difficult to regulate them effectively.
Given the growing complexity of eviction procedures and the constant evolution of case law, the intervention of specialized legal counsel is often decisive in eviction cases. Law firms specializing in tenancy law can provide decisive expertise, both for landlords wishing to ensure the validity of their actions, and for tenants seeking to assert their rights.
Appropriate legal support helps to identify procedural flaws, assess the chances of success of a dispute, and negotiate amicable solutions that protect everyone’s interests. Specialized lawyers can refer their clients to existing assistance schemes, and coordinate their action with that of social services where necessary.
These developments bear witness to a growing awareness of the many dimensions – legal, economic and social – of the problem of expulsions in Switzerland. While the principles of the Swiss legal framework remain fundamentally stable, its application is undergoing significant adaptation to meet contemporary challenges. The main challenge remains to reconcile effective protection of the right to housing with respect for the legitimate rights of landlords, in an increasingly tense real estate context.
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