Short answer. Bad use alone does not end a usufruct, but Article 610 lets the owner demand delivery of the thing to himself once the abuse causes considerable injury. The usufructuary keeps his right to the proceeds — the owner must pay him annually the net proceeds, after deducting expenses and a fair administration fee.
What the law says
A usufruct is not extinguished by bad use of the thing in usufruct; but if the abuse should cause considerable injury to the owner, the latter may demand that the thing be delivered to him, binding himself to pay annually to the usufructuary the net proceeds of the same, after deducting the expenses and the compensation which may be allowed him for its administration.
Civil Code, Article 610 — Abuse Does Not Automatically End It. Read the full provision →
Bad use, by itself, does not end the usufruct
Article 610 starts from a clear baseline: a usufruct is not extinguished by bad use of the thing in usufruct. Mere mismanagement or careless use, even if it falls short of what a careful usufructuary should do, does not by itself terminate the right. The usufruct survives ordinary bad use, and the owner cannot treat the arrangement as over just because the usufructuary is not handling the property well.
The threshold that changes things: considerable injury
The remedy Article 610 actually gives the owner only opens up once the abuse rises to something more serious — considerable injury to the owner. Not every instance of poor administration reaches that bar; the statute is written around a meaningful degree of harm, not routine wear or an occasional lapse in care. Whether a given course of abuse crosses that line is a factual question that depends on how much the owner's interest in the property has actually been harmed.
What the owner can demand once that threshold is met
Once the abuse causes considerable injury, Article 610 lets the owner demand that the thing be delivered to him. This takes physical control of the property away from the usufructuary without ending the usufruct as a legal relationship — the usufructuary's underlying right continues, it is simply no longer being exercised through direct management of the property, which passes to the owner instead.
The usufructuary still gets the value of his right
Taking back the property is not free for the owner. In exchange, Article 610 requires him to bind himself to pay annually to the usufructuary the net proceeds of the same, after deducting the expenses of administering the property and whatever compensation is allowed for that administration. In effect, the owner takes over running the property but continues to pass through to the usufructuary what the usufruct would have been worth, net of the cost of managing it.