The regular cosmetic repairs, there is often a dispute: Who needs Wallpaper, painting, whitewashing – the tenant or the landlord? Today a judgment of the Federal court of justice (BGH) in an important question clarifies the fronts.
After the trial a week ago, is already clear: The Supreme civil judges in Karlsruhe are striving to make it possible both sides are right.
As well as all lease burdens, the beauty on repairs to the tenant. This is, in principle, allowed. Not every standard clause is also allowed. As the Supreme court in 2015, has decided that tenants who receive a nonrenovated housing, do not have to renovate at their own expense. Otherwise, you would have to give the apartment in the worst case, a beautiful back, as you have taken yourself.
The Problem: so Far, it is unclear whether, instead, the landlord must step into the breach. The judges now have two cases from Berlin on the table, in which this refuses. The tenant moved in in 2002 and 1992, and since then nobody has brought the housing in shot.
According to the law, the landlord must leave the apartment “in a contractual use of the appropriate state” and “in this state” to obtain. Only: To the origin state, there is no going Back. The apartments are worn-out than at the beginning. The landlords would renovate would be your condition, in turn, a lot better.
The presiding judge Karin Milger had outlined, therefore, in the negotiation of a compromise solution. Thereafter, the tenant could require the landlord to Renovate, would have to be a part of the cost. The basic requirement would be that the condition of the apartment has deteriorated since the reference clearly.
One of the tenants-lawyers had warned of new problems and questions: What exactly should be done? Who is allowed to determine which color or Wallpaper on the wall? How the costs are distributed? A compromise would lead to a “Wealth of practical problems can not solve,” he warned (Az. VIII ZR 163/18, etc.).