District Court of Bremen, 23 June 2016, 6 C 186/16
Strong, persistent noise, especially from construction work, can have both physical and psychological effects on those exposed to it. This can be particularly burdensome in one’s own home, which is often defined as a place of retreat.
If a tenant is disturbed by noise, they may, under certain circumstances, claim a rent reduction from the landlord. However, it is questionable whether a tenant can also demand the complete cessation of noise through a temporary injunction against the landlord.
Whether a tenant can demand that their landlord refrain from noise-intensive modernization work—such as drilling, sawing, or hammering, as well as work involving construction machinery—at certain times of the day depends on whether the noise disturbance constitutes a violation of possession according to § 862 (1) of the German Civil Code (BGB).
This may be the case, for example, if the tenant is disturbed in their sleep, even if that sleep is intended to take place in the afternoon because the tenant must work night shifts.
Facts of the Case:
The landlord was carrying out extensive modernization measures on the building.
In this case, the defendant (landlord) had informed the plaintiff (tenant) in a letter dated 22 October 2015 about energy-saving modernization measures planned for the occupied building. These included improvements to the roof insulation, the removal of the existing roof covering, insulation of the basement ceiling, and renovation of the balconies with scaffold construction. The duration of the measures was to be from January to September 2016.
The plaintiff worked as a laborer in a warehouse daily from 2:00 AM to 10:30 AM. The time he needed for sleep was between 11:30 AM and 4:30 PM and between 8:00 PM and 3:00 AM.
As a night worker, he required sufficient sleep during the day.
In a subsequent letter, the plaintiff pointed out to the defendant that due to his work hours, he needed undisturbed sleep from around 12 PM to 1 PM. As an alternative solution, he proposed that the defendant provide him with a temporary replacement apartment during the modernization measures. This led to a correspondence between the plaintiff and the defendant, but ultimately no agreement was reached. Additionally, the defendant consistently refused further negotiations.
The modernization work began, resulting in significant noise and vibrations in the plaintiff’s rented apartment. On weekdays, from 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM and on Saturdays from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM, there was continuous use of drills, saws, jackhammers, concrete mixers, and other equipment. Even with earplugs, the plaintiff could not tolerate the noise.
Tenant Attempts to Prohibit Noise Through Temporary Injunction
As a result, the plaintiff was prevented from sleeping, and he was now on the brink of a health breakdown, having to take sick leave due to his inability to work.
Therefore, the plaintiff filed a request for a temporary injunction with the District Court of Bremen, seeking to stop the noise caused by the landlord.
Judgment of the District Court of Bremen:
The District Court of Bremen has now ruled that the plaintiff, as a tenant, does not have to tolerate disturbances in the form of loud noise—specifically, the use of drills, saws, jackhammers, concrete mixers, and a large crane—after 1:00 PM.
According to § 854 BGB, disturbances are significant impairments. Thus, only significant impairments are to be regarded as disturbances in the sense of § 854 BGB, particularly those as defined in § 906 BGB (BGH, judgment of 12 December 2003 – V ZR 180/03, NJW 2004, 775; analogous for possession disputes among parties: BGH of 14 April 1954 – VI ZR 35/53, JZ 1954, 613; Joost in: Münchener Kommentar, 6th edition 2013, § 858 Rn. 5). The claim for injunction arises from §§ 862 (1), 858 (1) BGB, as the plaintiff was unlawfully disturbed in his possession.
Tenant Unlawfully Disturbed in His Possession by Noise
Therefore, the plaintiff, who depends on undisturbed daytime sleep due to his night work, is entitled, according to § 862 (1) BGB, to demand the cessation of noise-intensive modernization measures at certain times of the day, as he was unlawfully disturbed in his possession. Given the daily duration, intensity, and expected duration of the work until September 2016, there was a significant noise disturbance in the sense of § 906 (1) BGB.
Source: District Court of Bremen
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.