Locations de courte durée au Val d'Europe – ordonnance du tribunal administratif de Melun

The ordinance issued by the Tribunal administratif de Melun addresses a legal dispute concerning short‑term rental authorisations in the Val d’Europe agglomeration, a region encompassing ten communes near Disneyland Paris. The case was brought by the Association des loueurs saisonniers des communautés du Val d’Europe, represented by Me Steinberg and Andrieux, seeking suspension of a municipal deliberation that imposed prior authorisation for changing the usage of residential properties into short‑term tourist rentals. The tribunal, presided over by Judge Letort, ruled against the association, confirming the legality of the deliberation and ordering the association to pay €1 500 in costs.

• Amount sought as compensation by the tribunal: €3 000 (article L. 761‑1).
• Court‑ordered payment to the agglomeration: €1 500.
• Projected population growth for Val d’Europe: +12 700 inhabitants by 2028.
• Annual new housing construction: approximately 500 units.
• Share of short‑term rentals in the housing stock: 3 % of total dwellings.
• Vacancy rate reported: 7.3 % (average national level).

The dispute invokes article L. 521‑1 of the Code de justice administrative, allowing a judge of référés to suspend administrative decisions when urgency and serious legal doubt are demonstrated. The tribunal examined the compatibility of the local regulation with EU law, particularly directives on services, and French codes on housing and local government (articles L. 631‑7, L. 631‑7‑1, L. 2121‑10, L. 2121‑13). Prior rulings (e.g., the 2022 suspension of a similar measure) and several prefectural orders from 2021‑2023 were cited to establish a recognised housing shortage in the area.

The ordinance aims to mitigate the impact of short‑term rentals on long‑term housing availability, a concern for sustainable urban development. By requiring prior authorisation and, in certain zones (Chessy and Serris), a compensation mechanism (conversion of other premises into housing), the policy seeks to balance tourism‑driven economic benefits with the need to preserve affordable, long‑term residences. The tribunal affirmed that the measure is proportionate, non‑discriminatory, and justified by an “impérieuse d’intérêt général” to combat housing scarcity.

Data presented indicate a substantial rise in secondary residences (from 1 176 in 2014 to 1 953 in 2020) and an 830 % increase in declared short‑term rentals between 2017 and 2024. Nevertheless, the majority of the housing stock (≈84 %) remains primary residences, limiting the overall impact of short‑term rentals on vacancy rates. The region’s vacancy rate of 7 % is below the national average, while rental and land prices have risen sharply, reinforcing the perceived need for regulatory intervention.

The tribunal concluded that the association failed to demonstrate a serious doubt regarding the legality of the deliberation, nor did it satisfy the urgency requirement. It found no evidence of disproportionate impact or procedural defects in the adoption of the regulation. Consequently, the request for suspension was rejected, and the association was ordered to bear part of the litigation costs.

The case reflects a wider European challenge: reconciling the growth of the short‑term rental market with the preservation of affordable, long‑term housing. The French legal approach, as illustrated here, combines administrative authorisation, targeted compensation, and judicial oversight to ensure that tourism development does not undermine housing sustainability. These mechanisms may inform comparable policies in other EU regions facing similar pressures from tourism‑driven housing conversion.