Abstract

Even against the opinion of the national authors, the Supreme Court considers thecohabiting relationship as an opposable title against actions of precarious. To justify hisposition, he uses at least two criteria: the existence of children in common and theauthorizations of the owners. The idea behind this work is that these criteria do not prove tobe adequate since they do not allow the existence of an obligation of the owner to toleratethe use of his thing the defendant does. Consequently, cohabiting relationships do not constitute an opposable title in the face of precarious claims under article 2195, paragraph2°.

Keywords

Precarious cohabiting relationship Opposability Family Permission