Judgments about building and living | Parked incorrectly and quit

Anyone who parks their car in an inappropriate place must expect legal consequences. But not every such disruption to property also represents a violation of rental agreement obligations, according to the Law and Taxes information service of the Landesbausparkasse (LBS).

A tenant had repeatedly parked his vehicle on the driveway to a garage on the property. The owner of the property saw this as a significant breach of duty and terminated the rental agreement.

The judges at the Berlin Regional Court (Az. 63 S 193/23) considered the termination to be ineffective. Admittedly, parking in a garage certainly represents a disturbance to property. But that does not automatically constitute a significant breach of contractual obligation. Other legal action could be taken. Furthermore, no warning was given.

Damp walls and mold often lead to arguments about who is responsible for the damage. The landlord cannot simply claim that the tenant caused the problems through incorrect heating or ventilation.

Moisture damage occurred in a rented apartment. It was disputed between the parties whether there were causes for which the landlord was responsible or whether the tenant's behavior had led to the damage.

The Giessen Regional Court (Az. 1 S 171/23) initially saw the landlord as responsible. He must exclude all causes from his area of ​​responsibility, for example those of a structural nature. To do this, it is sufficient to prove that the building corresponds to the state of the art when it was constructed. Only when he has succeeded does the burden of proof shift to the tenant. This person may then have to prove that the moisture damage was not due to behavior for which he was responsible.

Ghosts, witches and artificial spider webs can also temporarily transform a listed residential area into a scary landscape. A citizen cannot demand that the city take action against such Halloween decorations if he neither lives in the settlement nor owns property there. He then lacks the necessary personal concern. Monument protection doesn't help him either, because it fundamentally serves the public interest and not the protection of individuals without any spatial connection to the monument. In addition, the Gelsenkirchen Administrative Court (Az. 16 L 2124/25) did not see any impairment of the monument value of the historical settlement in the temporary decorations. LBS/nd

This article cost you nothing. We do: for research, printing and technology. We saved on office rent as well as on printing and distribution. And we gave up salary. Nevertheless, the calculation doesn't work without you. We need 300,000 euros by the end of the year. You pay what you can, in return we keep writing.

No paywall, no fine print, just one goal: that nd stays.