13.07.2020 New ruling: ban on keeping dogs

Landlords can only prohibit keeping dogs in a rented apartment if the dog poses a specific danger or disturbance.

Tenants of an apartment in North Rhine-Westphalia had had a Great Dane since the start of their tenancy in 2015. When the animal died, they got a new one. Their rental agreement stipulated that keeping large dogs had to be approved by the landlord. So they asked their landlord to agree to keeping the dog.

To the tenants' great surprise, the landlord refused to give her consent this time. It could be that the other tenants felt intimidated by the size of the dog and she also wanted to avoid a copycat effect.

Whoever parries may stay

Of course, that was not what the dog owners wanted. They filed a lawsuit in the Paderborn District Court and were able to breathe a sigh of relief. The judges confirmed that they were entitled to permission to keep dogs. The landlord could only refuse to allow them to keep dogs if the four-legged friend posed a specific threat or nuisance. But that was not the issue.

Any fear of tenants or even a feared copycat effect should not lead to rejection. The latter would mean that no dog could be kept at all in an apartment building.

(Paderborn District Court, judgment of October 28, 2019 - 51 C 112/19) Tenants of an apartment in North Rhine-Westphalia had a Great Dane since the start of their tenancy in 2015. When the animal died, they got a new Great Dane. Their rental agreement stipulated that keeping large dogs had to be approved by the landlord. So they asked their landlord to agree to keeping the dog.

To the tenants' great surprise, the landlord refused to give her consent this time. It could be that the other tenants felt intimidated by the size of the dog and she also wanted to avoid a copycat effect.

Whoever parries may stay

Of course, that was not what the dog owners wanted. They filed a lawsuit in the Paderborn District Court and were able to breathe a sigh of relief. The judges confirmed that they were entitled to permission to keep dogs. The landlord could only refuse to allow them to keep dogs if the four-legged friend posed a specific threat or nuisance. But that was not the issue.

Any fear of tenants or even a feared copycat effect should not lead to rejection. The latter would mean that no dog could be kept at all in an apartment building.

(Paderborn District Court, judgment of 28.10.2019 - 51 C 112/19)

March 5, 2020

Construction noise and dirt in neighboring rental apartments are a rental defect

Dear readers,

Construction noise and dirt caused by construction work in neighboring rental apartments are a rental defect. However, minor visual impairments, such as a water stain on the ceiling, do not reduce the usability and are therefore not a defect. The Charlottenburg District Court made this clear in December 2019.

In November 2017, the tenant rented an apartment with 78.2 m² of living space (three rooms with adjoining rooms) on the upper floor. The (staggered) rent was €843.23 net cold. The rent including heating is €1,021.23. In May 2019, the tenant reported that construction work (core renovation) was being carried out in neighboring apartments, including removing screed, tearing down walls, replacing windows and heating, and that as a result, noises from chiseling, drilling and hammering could be heard in the tenant's apartment. Dust and dirt (pieces of plaster) were generated in the hallway, but not in the tenant's apartment, but only to an extreme extent for a short time. The work was carried out from Monday to Saturday from morning to evening. Painting and clearing work lasted from September 1 to 5, 2019.

At the same time, the tenant reported that there had been water leakage on the ceiling of the children's room as a result of work on the heating in the apartment above. The water that had leaked through caused a water stain about one meter long and between five and 30 centimeters wide to form on the ceiling of the children's room. The tenant announced that he would pay the rent with reservations because of the construction work and the water stain and that he was claiming a reduction of 13 percent on the gross rent for the period from May 21, 2019 to August 31, 2019 because of the construction work and seven percent because of the stain: The landlord sued for payment of the outstanding rent.

The landlord was partially successful with his claim! A reduction in rent according to Section 536 Paragraph 1 of the German Civil Code requires that the deviation between the actual and contractual condition of the rented premises is significant and reduces its usability. In the court's opinion, the stain was not an impairment of use. The tenant did not specifically claim that the children's room was only partially usable for entering, playing, sleeping, doing homework and generally spending time or other living. A minor visual impairment alone does not reduce usability. With regard to a risk of mold due to the water that had penetrated, there was no indication that this risk even existed or that it would impair usability.

With regard to the construction noise as well as dust and dirt in the stairwell due to the work on the second floor, the tenant was entitled to a reduction in rent. The construction noise and the dirt in the stairwell were not part of the contractual condition of the rental apartment. The type, extent and duration of the construction work, including the accumulation of dust and plaster in the stairwell and noise in the rental apartment, were largely undisputed for the period from May 21 to August 31, 2019.

The construction work in the form of a major renovation, including removing screed, tearing down walls, replacing windows and heating in the apartments directly above the apartment rented by the tenant, with noise from chiseling, drilling and hammering as well as dust and dirt in the stairwell, significantly impaired the usability of this apartment in accordance with Section 536 Paragraph 1 of the German Civil Code (BGB). The amount of the reduction of 13 percent was appropriate. The stain therefore did not justify a reduction, but due to noise and dirt in the stairwell for the period from September 1 to 5, 2019, a reduction was possible in accordance with Section 536 Paragraph 1 of the German Civil Code (BGB). A rate of 13 percent was appropriate (AG Charlottenburg, judgment of December 19, 2019, case number 230 C 79/19).

February 20, 2020

property tax reform:

Will it now be more expensive for property owners?

In April 2018, the Federal Constitutional Court declared the current property tax regulation to be unlawful because it contradicts the principle of equality and is outdated. The legislature now had until the end of 2019 to bring about a property tax reform. Will it now be more expensive for homeowners?

Old property tax rejected – New property tax reform

The property tax regulates the amount of tax on a property in a municipality and is particularly valuable for municipalities as it accounts for around 15 percent of their tax revenue. The property tax levies taxes on the ownership of a property and is based on its value. Unlike the real estate transfer tax, it is payable annually. However, the German property tax system is outdated as the figures for the valuation basis go back to 1935 in the east and 1964 in the west. The Federal Constitutional Court therefore decided on a property tax reform, which will come into force for the first time in 2025.