Tenancy law: Cancellation for personal use ineffective if the landlord intends to sell at the same time

Berlin Regional Court, 22 June 2016, Ref.: 65 S 386/15

A termination for personal use is invalid if it is only a pretended personal use. Often a landlord only wants to get rid of his tenant so that he can then sell his own house or flat at a high price.

For whom may I register personal use?

Facts of the Case:

Landlord had given notice of cancellation for personal use, but at the same time tried to sell the house

In this case, the landlord sued for eviction from the flat by means of a termination for personal use. The tenants stated that there was no need for personal use and that the reasons for this were merely pretence. The landlord had declared the termination for personal use on 2 October 2014 and wanted to sell the flat at the beginning of October 2014. The landlord's planned move to live closer to his daughters is no justification for the landlord's move, as he would only have occasional contact with his daughters.

Decision of the Berlin Regional Court

In contrast to the first instance, the Berlin Regional Court overturned the original judgement and dismissed the claim. The court came to the conclusion that this was an inadmissible preliminary termination. Furthermore, the court was of the opinion that the court of first instance should have honoured the tenants' objections. According to the court, the tenants had not groundlessly contested the request for personal use.

The court saw concrete evidence from the tenants that would cast doubt on the landlord's version of events

On the contrary, the tenants had concrete evidence that was presented and gave rise to considerable doubt as to the correctness of the reasons given by the landlord for the termination. The Berlin Regional Court therefore took evidence and came to the conclusion that the landlord did not have a legitimate interest within the meaning of Section 573 (2) No. 2 BGB. On the contrary, the landlord intended to sell the flat. On the other hand, the impression had been gained that the relationship with the daughters was strained and was not sufficient justification for a move.

Source: Berlin Regional Court

Important Note: The content of this article has been prepared to the best of our knowledge and belief. However, due to the complexity and constant evolution of the subject matter, we must exclude liability and warranty. Important Notice: The content of this article has been created to the best of our knowledge and understanding. However, due to the complexity and constant changes in the subject matter, we must exclude any liability and warranty.

If you need legal advice, please feel free to call us at 0221 - 80187670 or send us an email at or send an email to info@mth-partner.de info@mth-partner.de

Lawyers in Cologne provide advice and representation in tenancy law.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *