Court of Appeal confirms criminal liability for “overholding” tenants after termination of a lease in Cyprus
Overview
The Cyprus Court of Appeal, sitting in its criminal jurisdiction, has held that a tenant who remains in possession of immovable property after the landlord has unequivocally terminated the lease commits the offence of unlawful possession under Article 281(1)(a) of the Criminal Code, Cap. 154. The Court set aside a District Court judgment and confirmed that continued occupation in these circumstances amounts to possession without the consent of the registered owner. Whether the termination was contractually valid is a matter for the civil courts and does not defeat the elements of the criminal offence. This development provides owners with an immediate criminal law route in appropriate cases of post-termination holdover.
The statutory framework
Article 281 creates the offence of unlawful possession, cultivation, enjoyment or use of land registered in the name of another without the consent of the registered owner or other person lawfully authorised to consent. The provision applies where a person occupies or uses registered land without such consent. The offence is a misdemeanour punishable by imprisonment and or a fine, while attempt is expressly criminalised in Article 281(4).
Cyprus case law has previously underlined core elements of Article 281, in particular that the land must be “registered” in the name of another and that the absence of consent is central to liability.
What the Court of Appeal decided
The Court of Appeal held that a tenant who lawfully entered into possession under a tenancy agreement may nevertheless become an unlawful possessor once the landlord has clearly terminated the tenancy and demanded delivery up. From that point, refusal to vacate constitutes occupation without the owner’s consent within the meaning of Article 281(1)(a). The Court emphasised that any contractual dispute as to the correctness of termination is a civil matter that does not negate the actus reus or mens rea of the criminal offence under Article 281.
In practical terms, this means a landlord is not required to obtain a civil eviction order as a precondition to a criminal complaint where the lease has been terminated and possession has been demanded, although the civil process remains available for recovery of possession and mesne profits.
Relationship with the Rent Control regime
Cyprus maintains a dual framework that distinguishes between contractual tenancies and statutory tenancies under the Rent Control Law. Jurisdictional questions often arise as to whether and when a tenancy becomes statutory and which forum has competence. Recent jurisprudence illustrates the importance of characterising the tenancy correctly when pursuing rent control remedies. The Court of Appeal’s clarification operates on the criminal plane and focuses on the status of consent post termination, not on rent control jurisdiction, which continues to be a civil law issue.
Practical implications
For owners and property managers
- Use clear termination notices
Ensure that termination complies with the tenancy terms and relevant legislation. The notice should be unequivocal, properly served and should demand vacant possession on a specified date. The clarity of termination and demand strengthens both criminal and civil avenues. - Consider a criminal complaint where holdover persists
If a tenant remains after valid termination and after a formal demand to deliver possession, the matter may be reported to the Police with reference to Article 281(1)(a). Provide the registered title details, the tenancy agreement, the termination notice, proof of service and a chronology evidencing lack of consent after the termination date. - Preserve civil claims in parallel
Criminal proceedings do not restore possession. File civil proceedings where appropriate for an order for possession and for mesne profits or damages for use and occupation. This remains necessary where you seek a possession order, arrears and consequential relief. - Avoid self-help eviction
Owners should not change locks or forcibly remove occupants. Self-help may expose owners to civil liability and potential criminal exposure. Resort to lawful criminal complaint and civil court process.
For tenants and occupiers
- Respect post-termination demands
Following a clear termination and demand to vacate, remaining in occupation risks prosecution under Article 281. Disagreement with the landlord about the validity of termination must be pursued through civil proceedings and does not provide a defence to criminal liability for continued occupation without consent. - Seek urgent civil remedies if termination is disputed
A tenant who contests termination should seek civil relief, for example declarations or interim orders where appropriate, but should be aware that the existence of a civil dispute does not negate the criminal elements where occupation continues without the registered owner’s consent.
Key elements to establish an offence under Article 281 in the holdover context
- Registered ownership
The immovable property must be registered in the name of someone other than the accused. Title particulars from the Department of Lands and Surveys are central proof. - Absence of consent following termination
Once the lease is terminated and demand for delivery up is made, any continued occupation lacks the registered owner’s consent. Evidence includes termination notices, correspondence and any grace periods granted. - Knowledge or reasonable awareness
Article 281 requires that the occupier knows or reasonably should know that he lacks the registered owner’s consent. Proper service of the termination notice, delivery receipts and follow-up demands are probative on this element.
Procedure and evidence checklist for owners
• Certified copy of the title or an official search confirming the registered owner
• The tenancy agreement and any renewals or variations
• The termination notice and proof of service in accordance with contract and law
• A written demand for delivery of possession with a reasonable deadline
• A short timeline of events and records of any rent arrears or use and occupation after termination
• Photographs or utility records evidencing continued occupation, if available
• A concise cover letter to the Police referencing Article 281(1)(a) and the decision of the Court of Appeal as reported on 7 November 2025
Frequently asked questions
Is a civil eviction order still necessary
A civil order is required to regain possession. The criminal route addresses unlawful occupation as an offence and may deter further holdover, but it does not substitute for a possession order.
What if the tenant claims the termination was invalid
That remains a civil dispute to be determined by the competent court. It does not negate the lack of consent element for Article 281 once clear termination and demand have occurred.
What penalties apply
Article 281 provides criminal penalties for unlawful possession and separately specifies that attempt is punishable. The provision has been amended over time, and the exact maxima depend on the subsection and subsequent amendments. Specialist advice should be taken on the applicable penalty framework in a given case.
Conclusion
The Court of Appeal’s ruling significantly strengthens owners’ immediate legal options against tenants who hold over after termination. It confirms that continued occupation without the registered owner’s consent falls within Article 281(1)(a) of the Criminal Code, regardless of any parallel civil dispute about contractual termination. Owners should continue to employ careful notice practice, avoid self-help, consider timely criminal complaints in appropriate cases and pursue civil possession and monetary relief in parallel.
