Facts
The spouses R. rented a house in Triengen, which serves as their family residence. The spouses M., owners of the house, terminated the lease for non-payment of rent (art. 257d CO) and requested the eviction of the tenants. The cantonal court ordered the eviction and confirmed the validity of the termination. The spouses R. filed a subsidiary constitutional appeal against this decision, alleging a violation of art. 4 Cst.
The spouses M. had sent two completed termination forms, one addressed to the husband and the other to the wife, by registered mail with acknowledgement of receipt. The husband received both mailings and accepted them. The issue in dispute is whether the termination was validly notified to the wife, even though the mailing intended for her was handed over to her husband.
Considerations
The federal court examined the question of whether the termination notified separately to the tenant's spouse was valid. According to art. 266n CO, the termination must be notified separately to the spouse of the tenant. The court considered that the termination notified to the wife by handing over to her husband the copy of the termination addressed to her was valid, as it had entered the wife's sphere of influence.
The court applied the general principles relating to the receipt of declarations of intent to consider that the termination had reached the wife as soon as it had entered her sphere of influence. It also considered that the fact that the husband had received the mailing intended for the wife did not render the termination null, as the wife should have taken measures to ensure that mailings intended…