{"id":4859,"date":"2016-03-14T09:14:30","date_gmt":"2016-03-14T09:14:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/?p=4859"},"modified":"2025-10-28T05:36:13","modified_gmt":"2025-10-28T05:36:13","slug":"mietrecht-eigenbedarfskuendigung-unwirksam-wenn-alternativwohnung-im-selben-haus-nicht-angeboten-wurde","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/tenancy-law-termination-of-personal-use-ineffective-if-alternative-flat-in-the-same-building-was-not-offered\/","title":{"rendered":"Tenancy law: cancellation for personal use ineffective if alternative flat in the same building was not offered."},"content":{"rendered":"

Cologne Local Court, 16 December 2015, Ref.: 221 C 282\/15<\/strong><\/p>\n

In Cologne, too, the various residential districts have been increasingly upgraded in recent years through urban planning optimisation and the refurbishment of residential buildings.<\/p>\n

As a result, many landlords are trying to get rid of their long-established tenants by terminating their tenancy agreements and ultimately suing for eviction because the existing tenancy agreements have become unprofitable. This process, known as gentrification, is increasingly occupying the courts in Cologne and the surrounding area.<\/p>\n

However, both landlords and tenants should bear in mind that it is often difficult to enforce a termination for personal use and that many formal peculiarities must be observed.<\/p>\n

In the case discussed here, the Cologne Local Court had to decide whether the owner's termination of the tenant's personal use of the flat was legal, even though the owner had not offered the tenant sued an alternative flat in the residential building.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

<\/span>Facts: Tenancy agreement and termination of personal use<\/span><\/h3>\n

In this case, the plaintiff was the co-owner of an apartment block in Cologne. As such, she entered into the rental agreement dated 16 June 1983 for a flat on the first floor. The flat had four rooms, a kitchen, a bathroom and a toilet, with a living space of approx. 80 square metres. The tenant of the flat was the defendant.<\/p>\n

On 15 April 2015, the plaintiff and the other owner terminated the defendant's rental agreement with effect from 31 January 2016 for personal use. The plaintiff stated that she wanted to move out of her previous 3-room rental flat and combine the flat on the ground floor with the flat used by the defendant on the first floor. She wanted to create enough space for herself, a joint child and another child. An objection against the cancellation<\/a> did not take place initially.<\/p>\n

<\/span>Living situation in the building<\/span><\/h3>\n

The apartment block in question had a total of four residential units: one on the ground floor, one on the first floor, one on the first floor and one in the attic.<\/p>\n