Fixed-term letting in Zurich: the three-month line and what begins beyond it

The line runs at three months

Article 253a paragraph 2 of the Swiss Code of Obligations exempts holiday flats let for no more than three months from the provisions on the letting of residential and commercial premises. No protection against termination, no extension proceedings, no challenge to the initial rent. That is why holiday letting is the simple case in tenancy law — not because a platform sits in between.

Letting the same flat to the same person for four months puts you in a different world. Then the full tenancy law for residential premises applies, with everything that hangs on it: extension, challenge to the initial rent, and in the canton of Zurich the mandatory form.

This is not a question of interpretation but a line in the statute. And it does not run where most people assume — not between «Airbnb» and «tenancy», but between up to three months and beyond.

Fixed-term does not mean the flat is free on the end date

Under Article 255 paragraph 2 CO, a fixed-term tenancy ends without notice once the agreed period has run. That is the sentence many people rely on — and it is not the whole picture.

The extension under Article 272 CO also applies to fixed-term tenancies. A tenant for whom the end causes hardship not justified by the landlord’s interests can request one. The request must reach the conciliation authority no later than 60 days before expiry; for residential premises an extension can run up to four years in total.

In practice that means a twelve-month contract can become a five-year one if the circumstances speak for it and you have no overriding grounds against it. Anyone who needs the flat back on a particular date — because they are moving in, selling or rebuilding — should not rest that on an end date in the contract.

The contrast with holiday letting is clear at this point: a guest staying three nights has no right to an extension, because tenancy law for residential premises does not apply to them.

Why chained fixed terms are a risk

The obvious thought is: then several fixed-term contracts one after another, each permissible in itself. That construction is precisely the case the courts examine.

A fixed term is an abuse of rights if its sole purpose is to circumvent the protective provisions of tenancy law. A weighty indication is where, amid a housing shortage, only fixed-term contracts are systematically offered although the tenant wants an open-ended one and no objective reason for the fixed term exists. Proof need not be conclusive; a preponderant probability in the individual case suffices.

Conversely: where there is a genuine reason — a planned conversion, an approved renovation, a stay abroad with a return date, the flat is being sold — a fixed term is unproblematic. The difference lies not in the form of contract but in whether the reason exists and can be evidenced.

The initial rent and the Zurich form requirement

In the canton of Zurich, a landlord concluding a new tenancy over residential space must notify the previous and the new rent on an official form. The basis is Article 270 paragraph 2 CO and § 229b of the Introductory Act to the Civil Code; the requirement has been in force since 1 November 2013.

It hangs on the vacancy rate: if that stands at 1.5 per cent or below, the cantonal government orders the form requirement with effect from 1 November of the same year. In the canton of Zurich it stood at 0.48 per cent on 1 June 2025 — the question of whether it applies does not currently arise.

Since 1 October 2025 the form must also state which reference interest rate the previous tenant’s rent was based on. If the form is missing or incomplete, the initial rent can be void — with the consequence that it has to be set anew.

None of this applies to holiday letting up to three months: Article 253a paragraph 2 CO exempts it from these provisions. Swiss tenancy law knows no statutory furniture surcharge, incidentally; a furnished rent is subject to the same general limit as any other, namely the prohibition on excessive returns under Article 269 CO.

If you are a tenant yourself

Then the starting position is different, and the decisive provision is Article 262 CO: subletting requires the landlord’s consent. They may refuse it on three grounds only — if you do not disclose the terms, if those terms are abusive compared with your own tenancy, or if the sublet causes them material disadvantages.

Subletting without consent risks the termination of your own tenancy. That is the commonest mistake in short-term letting by tenants, and it is not theoretical.

What that means in practice is set out at length in the article on subletting a rented flat. In short: ask, in writing, stating the terms — and keep the answer.

What follows from this

At the three-month line the legal question changes field of law, and each side has its own risk.

• Up to three months: simple in tenancy law, but zoning and building law decide. In the city of Zurich, since the Federal Supreme Court ruling of 30 April 2026, what matters is whether anybody still lives in the flat.
• Beyond three months: unproblematic in zoning terms because it remains residential use — but with extension rights, the form requirement and the question of whether the fixed term has an objective reason.
• Do not rely on the end date of a fixed-term contract if you need the flat back on a particular day. Nor rely on the label «living for a season» — what is agreed is decisive, not what it is called.
• We operate short-term and holiday letting, that is the left-hand column. Fixed-term residential tenancy and long-term letting are not part of our offering, and we do not advise on legal questions. For your address, your municipal building authority gives information; for the contract, a lawyer specialising in tenancy law.