Berlin-Mitte Local Court, 07/06/2016, Ref.: 116 C 190/15
The tenant can avert a correct cancellation for personal use if there is a so-called case of hardship. Typical cases of hardship are, for example
-
-
- Illness or disability
- Pregnancy
- Advanced age of the tenant
- Adequate replacement living space cannot be procured
-
Cancellation for personal use due to the landlord's new professional situation
This case concerned a landlord's termination of personal use who claimed his condominium in Berlin for himself. The landlord needed the flat during the week as he was living in the city due to a new job. However, the tenant did not vacate the flat voluntarily, which led to the landlord filing an action for eviction with the Berlin-Mitte district court.
Objection by the tenant for health reasons
The tenant objected to the termination for personal use and claimed that there was particular hardship. The tenant had considerable difficulties finding a new flat due to serious health problems, including a laryngectomy. His justification was based on the fact that he was at a particular disadvantage due to his inability to speak and other health restrictions, which made it considerably more difficult to find accommodation.
Judgement of the Berlin-Mitte district court: Hardship case recognised, but limited in time
The Berlin-Mitte district court recognised the landlord's notice of termination for personal use as fundamentally effective. However, the court ruled that immediate eviction would constitute unreasonable hardship due to the tenant's particular health circumstances. The court found that the tenant was currently unable to find a replacement flat on his own due to his state of health and referred to this as "inability to evict". However, this inability was not permanent, but primarily related to the current situation.
Extension of the lease term by 1.5 years
Despite the health-related hardship, the court argued that a permanent continuation of the tenancy was not necessary. According to Section 574a (1) of the German Civil Code (BGB), there is a particular difficulty in finding accommodation, but this does not necessarily have to be the case in the future. The court therefore granted the tenant an extension of 1.5 years within which the tenancy should be continued. After this period expires, the tenancy ends automatically without the need for a further notice of termination.
Conclusion: Balancing of interests between tenant and landlord
The judgement illustrates the difficult balancing of interests that courts have to undertake in cases of personal use terminations. On the one hand, the landlord's justified personal use was recognised, while on the other hand, the tenant with severe health restrictions was granted an extension in order to take into account the particular hardships associated with his search for accommodation.
Source: District Court of Frankfurt am Main
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.