A claimant filed a case against a defendant before the court. They requested the court to order the defendant to vacate a rented property and pay the rent due. They said that they had obtained the property via an auction and that the defendant had illegally seized it.

The court ruled that the defendant should vacate the rented property and that the defendant should pay a monthly rent of 200 Dinars.

The defendant appealed the ruling before the court of appeal. The court upheld the appealed ruling.

The defendant appealed the ruling before the court of cassation. They said in their grounds of appeal that the ruling had erred in the application of law. They said that they had maintained before the court that the tenancy agreement was still valid but the court had dismissed this defence.

The court said that this argument wasvalid. The court said that the case documents revealed that the tenancy agreement wasstill valid and therefore the claimant did not have the right to evict the defendant from the property.