On 9 October 2025, the Belgian Constitutional Court rendered its Judgment 131/2025, rejecting the challenge to the 2023 Brussels-Capital Region ordinance that altered the procedural rules governing evictions from dwellings — most notably the measure mandating a moratorium on the execution of evictions from 1 November to 15 March.
What the Court decided
-
The Court found that Brussels’ legislature was competent to adopt the contested provisions.
-
It concluded that the procedural safeguards (such as delays before enforcement, the winter moratorium, and rights to present a relocation solution) do not violate the constitutional rights of access to a judge or the protection of property.
-
Regarding the winter moratorium in particular, the Court observed that it pursues a legitimate aim: preventing inhumane situations when no alternative housing is available.
-
The Court emphasised that the moratorium is not absolute: a tenant must pay an “occupancy indemnity” (generally equivalent to rent), and there are four exceptions allowing eviction during the winter period (e.g. if the tenant secures alternative housing, if the property is dangerous, grave behavior, or the landlord must personally occupy due to force majeure).
-
Ultimately, the Court considered that the balance struck by these rules is proportionate — the burdens on property owners are limited and justified in light of the strong public interest in the right to housing.
Why this matters for housing rights in Europe
This ruling marks a significant victory for rights-based housing policy in Brussels. It confirms that regional authorities can adopt robust procedural protections in eviction law, including seasonal moratoria, without breaching constitutional constraints.
For networks and organisations across Europe, the decision provides a practical example of how to legally establish safeguards for vulnerable tenants, such as delays, proof of required relocation and indemnity schemes, while preserving enforceability and proportionality.
Read the full text of Judgment 131/2025 on the Constitutional Court’s website. (in French)
