- within Real Estate and Construction topic(s)
- within Transport, Law Department Performance and Employment and HR topic(s)
The recent judgment of the Cyprus Court of Appeal in CCSRE Real Estate Company Ltd v. Theodorou Menelaou (Crim. App. 94/2022, 31.10.2025) brings to the forefront a long-standing yet sensitive issue: when does a tenant's continued occupation of a property, after the termination of the lease, transform from a civil dispute into a criminal offence of unlawful possession under Article 281(1)(a) of the Penal Code.
According to Article 281(1)(a) of the Penal Code, anyone who "possesses, cultivates, occupies or otherwise uses land registered in the name of another without the consent of the registered owner" commits a criminal offence punishable by imprisonment of up to five years and/or a monetary fine.
The constituent elements of the offence, as recognised by the Court of Appeal, are:
- Possession, use or exploitation of land,
- The land is registered in the name of another, and
- The possession or use takes place without the consent of the registered owner.
The Court noted that "it is not disputed that the first two elements were proven" and focused its reasoning on the third — consent.
- The Court of Appeal's Reasoning on Consent
The Court of Appeal rejected the trial court's view that the existence of a previous lease implied continuing consent even after its termination.
According to the wording of the judgment:
"Since the agreement had been expressly and clearly terminated, it follows that the Respondent occupied the property without the consent of the registered owner. Any other conclusion would undermine the purpose of the legislation."
This statement establishes an objective and absolute approach to consent: once the owner explicitly withdraws consent, any continued occupation of the property becomes criminally punishable.
The Court further stressed that it was irrelevant whether the termination was lawful or not:
"Nor can it be examined, within the framework of a charge under Article 281(1) of the Penal Code, whether the agreement was terminated 'unlawfully'. Such unlawfulness may have relevance only in the context of a civil action for damages."
In other words, the criminal court does not consider whether the landlord terminated the lease lawfully or abusively; the only factor that matters is the formal absence of consent.
It is precisely this disconnection between the legality of the termination and the issue of consent that raises the greatest concerns.
- From Civil to Criminal Liability
The judgment overturns the traditional understanding that continued possession after lease termination primarily constitutes a civil wrong (e.g., overholding or unlawful detention).
By its reasoning, the Court of Appeal transfers the absence of consent into the realm of criminal law, effectively creating a form of strict criminal liability.
This is problematic because it ignores the possibility that a tenant may genuinely believe that the termination was invalid or that he retains a right of occupation until the issue is determined by a civil court.
- Consent as a Legal and Factual State
The Court's interpretation treats consent as an instantaneous and absolute event.
In practice, however, consent is dynamic — it may be reinstated or modified, especially when the parties are engaged in negotiations or when civil proceedings are pending.
Adopting such a rigid approach overlooks the fluid nature of contractual relations and risks criminalising mere disagreement.
- The Purpose of Article 281 and the Principle of
Ultima Ratio
Article 281 of the Penal Code was enacted to protect property rights against unlawful possession or exploitation of land without the owner's consent.
However, as recognised in prior case law (Robb v. Police (2012) 2 A.A.D. 201), it concerns an offence of a continuing nature, designed to address cases of unauthorised occupation — not contractual disputes.
Its extension to tenants who initially possessed the property lawfully but dispute the termination stretches the ratio legis of the provision and breaches the principle of ultima ratio, according to which criminal law must serve as a last resort, not as an instrument of pressure.
- Risk of Abusive Application
The Court's reasoning makes consent — or rather the absence of it — the sole criterion of criminal liability.
Thus, a landlord seeking to regain possession may, by issuing a simple termination notice, trigger criminal responsibility against the tenant.
The judgment provides no safeguard against abusive or disputed terminations, thereby reinforcing the imbalance of power between landlord and tenant and undermining the principle of proportionality.
- Constitutional and Social Implications
The absolute interpretation of consent may conflict with the fundamental principle of proportionality and the presumption of innocence enshrined in Article 12 of the Constitution.
On a social level, it introduces the risk of criminalising contractual or financial hardship, particularly in an environment of rising rents and contested lease terminations.
Criminal law should not substitute civil law, nor should it be used as a mechanism for enforcing private claims.
Conclusion
The decision in CCSRE Real Estate Company Ltd v. Menelaou marks a significant interpretative development: it confirms that, following the explicit termination of a lease, continued occupation without surrender constitutes unlawful possession without consent under Article 281 of the Penal Code.
However, by expressly stating that the legality or illegality of the termination "may have relevance only in a civil action," the Court sets a potentially dangerous precedent.
The protection of property rights is legitimate and necessary. Yet when criminal law intrudes into the realm of civil disputes, the balance between landlord and tenant is disrupted — creating a serious risk of abusive criminal prosecutions by landlords driven by ulterior motives.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
