Andorra Constitutional Court Rejects Tenant Appeal Over 2017 Rental Contract

The Constitutional Court has declined to hear a tenant's appeal against a Superior Court of Justice ruling that confirmed the termination of his 2017 rental contract and his obligation to return the property to its owner, according to the judgment published in the Official Bulletin (BOPA).

The court concluded that the appellant's fundamental rights were not violated and that the judicial decisions were properly reasoned.

The case dates back to a lease signed in September 2017. The owner sought a court order to end the contractual relationship and recover the flat. In January 2026, the Batllia ruled in the landlord's favour, ordering the tenant to vacate the property, pay outstanding rent and pay €582.33 a month as compensation for unlawful occupation until the flat is handed over. The Superior Court upheld that decision in May, prompting the tenant to take the matter to the Constitutional Court.

Before the Constitutional Court, the tenant argued that he had not properly received notice of the owner's intention not to renew the contract, contending that posting a letter in a mailbox did not guarantee it reached the recipient. He also said he was entitled to the three-year legal extension provided for under housing rental rules. He asked for the judgment to be annulled, the extension recognised and the order to pay court costs withdrawn.

The court found that notification had been proven through a certificate from the delivery company, photographs and a video showing that the letter had been placed in the mailbox. It also held that the Superior Court had adequately explained why the rental extension did not apply in this case: the extension approved under government legislation was not automatic in the absence of agreement between the parties, the owner had correctly notified the intention not to renew, and the tenant had not invoked his right to an extension. The Constitutional Court found that interpretation properly justified and not in breach of the appellant's rights.

The ruling of 12 October, published on Wednesday, states that the appellant was able to present his arguments before both judicial instances and dismisses any suggestion of arbitrariness in the decisions. It leaves in place the obligation to return the flat and to pay the amounts set by the courts.