{"id":5360,"date":"2018-10-13T14:05:24","date_gmt":"2018-10-13T14:05:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/?p=5360"},"modified":"2025-08-25T13:11:59","modified_gmt":"2025-08-25T13:11:59","slug":"mietrecht-veranlassung-zur-klageerhebung-bei-nichtreaktion-des-mieters-auf-die-fristgebundene-aufforderung-des-vermieters-zu-modernisierungsmassnahmen","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/tenancy-law-cause-to-bring-an-action-if-the-tenant-does-not-respond-to-the-landlords-request-to-carry-out-modernisation-measures-within-the-specified-period\/","title":{"rendered":"Tenancy law: Cause to bring an action if the tenant does not respond to the landlord's request for modernisation measures within the deadline"},"content":{"rendered":"

Berlin Regional Court, 25.01.2018, Ref.: 67 T 9\/18<\/strong><\/p>\n

The allocation of costs in court proceedings is governed by Sections 91 et seq. ZPO. Pursuant to Section 91 (1) ZPO, the unsuccessful party must generally bear the costs of the legal dispute, in particular reimburse the costs incurred by the opposing party insofar as they were necessary for the appropriate prosecution or legal defence. The reimbursement of costs also includes compensation to the opposing party for time lost due to necessary travelling or the necessary attendance of appointments.<\/p>\n

In the event of a partial victory, the allocation of costs is based on Section 92 ZPO. This means that if each party wins in part and loses in part, the costs must be set off against each other or divided proportionately. If the costs are set off against each other, each party shall bear half of the court costs.<\/p>\n

Section 93 ZPO regulates a special case of cost allocation. If the defendant has not given rise to the action through his behaviour, the plaintiff is liable for the legal costs if the defendant immediately acknowledges the claim, i.e. even if the action itself is well-founded.<\/p>\n

In the following decision, the Berlin Regional Court had to decide whether a one-off failure to respond to a letter of request to tolerate modernisation measures was sufficient for the assumption of such an inducement if such toleration had already been granted in the past. The court assumed that if the landlord announces modernisation measures to the tenant and the tenant does not respond to a separate - time-bound - request from the landlord to declare his future willingness to tolerate the measures, the tenant, unless he is already in default of tolerating the announced measures himself before the court, will at best give cause to bring an action within the meaning of Section 93 ZPO.This is the case if the landlord has put him in default with regard to the requested declaration on his future willingness to tolerate the measures before the action is brought. This requires - subject to the realisation of one of the exceptional circumstances of \u00a7 286 Para. 2 BGB - in accordance with \u00a7 286 Para. 1 BGB the issuing of a separate reminder following the unsuccessful original request by the landlord.<\/p>\n

<\/span>Facts of the Case:<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n

<\/span>Landlord and tenant argue about cost allocation after judgement of acknowledgement<\/span><\/h3>\n

Following an acknowledgement by the defendant, the parties are in dispute about the distribution of the cost burden. The plaintiff had lodged an immediate appeal against the decision on costs made in the acknowledgement judgement of the Local Court of Wedding dated 13 December 2017 - 19b C 56\/17.<\/p>\n

<\/span>Landlord had informed tenant about modernisation work<\/span><\/h3>\n

The plaintiff had informed the defendant in writing on 30 May 2016 about the implementation of modernisation measures. The defendants agreed to this in a letter dated 29 August 2016. However, the plaintiff initially did not carry out the measures, as he had not received confirmation from all of the affected tenants of the property in dispute that they would tolerate them.<\/p>\n

<\/span>Landlord had filed an action for acquiescence due to refusal<\/span><\/h3>\n

On 19 July 2017, the plaintiff again requested that the defendants submit a declaration of acquiescence by 21 July 2017. There was no response to this letter, whereupon the plaintiff filed an action for acquiescence on 27 September 2017. The defendants recognised the asserted claim in the written preliminary proceedings before the expiry of the deadline to respond, which is why the plaintiff was ordered to pay the costs of the legal dispute in accordance with Section 93 of the German Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO).<\/p>\n

<\/span>After acknowledgement, the issue was the distribution of the costs of the proceedings<\/span><\/h3>\n

The plaintiff lodged an immediate appeal against this, which the Local Court did not uphold and referred to the Chamber for a decision.<\/p>\n

<\/span>Decision of the Regional Court of Berlin<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n

The immediate appeal, which is admissible pursuant to Sections 567 et seq. and 99 (2) of the German Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO), is unsuccessful on the merits because the Local Court lawfully ordered the plaintiff to pay the costs.<\/p>\n

<\/span>Regional court saw landlord's obligation to bear costs<\/span><\/h3>\n

According to Section 93 ZPO, the plaintiff is liable for the legal costs if the defendant recognises the claim immediately and has not given rise to the action through its conduct. These conditions were fulfilled by the defendants. They immediately recognised the claim for toleration of modernisation measures within the meaning of Section 93 ZPO. Nor did their pre-litigation behaviour give rise to the filing of an action. This would have been the case if, from the plaintiff's point of view, the behaviour of the party prior to the lawsuit would have provided sufficient reason to assume that he would not be able to obtain his rights without recourse to the courts.<\/p>\n

<\/span>Tenants had no reason to file a lawsuit<\/span><\/h3>\n

A minority opinion is of the opinion that there are already grounds for bringing an action if the tenant does not comply with a declaration of acquiescence within the specified period. However, this view should not be followed. The court was able to leave open the question of whether such an obligation to declare its willingness to fulfil its obligations existed at all.<\/p>\n

According to the costs law principle of Section 93 ZPO, the defendant only gives cause to bring an action if he has already been in default before the court.<\/p>\n

This is regularly lacking in the case of modernisation measures announced by the landlord before court and later asserted by way of an action for acquiescence. This also applies irrespective of whether the claim for acquiescence asserted in the action is to be taken into account or whether a delay on the part of the tenant with the declaration demanded by the landlord regarding his future willingness to acquiesce is also sufficient. The defendants were neither in default with the fulfilment of the claim for acquiescence nor with any claim for a declaration of their future willingness to perform.<\/p>\n

<\/span>Landlord had not issued a proper reminder<\/span><\/h3>\n

There is no corresponding reminder from the landlord in accordance with \u00a7 286 Para. 1 BGB for the default of fulfilment of the toleration claim. This is also not dispensable as an exception in accordance with \u00a7 286 Para. 2 BGB.<\/p>\n

The same applies to the required declaration of the defendant's willingness to perform, which became due at the earliest upon receipt of the landlord's request to submit it. Here, too, the reminder was not dispensable.<\/p>\n

The plaintiff's letter of demand dated 19 July 2017 itself did not constitute a reminder despite the deadline it contained.<\/p>\n

It is true that a reminder can be combined with the creditor's action establishing the due date and thus be contained in the same letter. However, the defendants could not and did not have to understand the letter as a reminder on the basis of the interpretation parameters of \u00a7\u00a7 133, 157 BGB. A letter establishing the due date for the first time is not usually regarded as a reminder, even if a specific performance deadline is specified at the same time. This would require a separate reference to the occurrence of default or similar additions.<\/p>\n

As a result, the plaintiff had to bear the costs of the judgement of acknowledgement.<\/p>\n

Source: Berlin Regional Court<\/p>\n

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.<\/strong> 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.<\/p>\n

If you need legal advice, please feel free to call us at 0221 - 80187670<\/strong> or send us an email at or send an email to info@mth-partner.de info@mth-partner.de<\/strong><\/p>\n

Lawyers in Cologne provide advice and representation in tenancy law.<\/a><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Following court proceedings in tenancy law, a court decision on costs is requested once the proceedings have been concluded. The court will then issue an order in accordance with Section 91a ZPO. The costs are then divided between the parties according to the ratio of winning and losing. <\/p>","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":11961,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[43],"tags":[795,3293],"class_list":["post-5360","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-mietrecht-rechtsanwalt","tag-erhaltungsmasnahmen-modernisierungsmasnahmen-unterschied","tag-verteilung-kosten-sofortiges-anerkenntnis-modernisierungsmassnahmen"],"yoast_head":"\nMietrecht: Veranlassung zur Klageerhebung bei Nichtreaktion des Mieters auf die fristgebundene Aufforderung des Vermieters zu Modernisierungsma\u00dfnahmen<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Die Kostenverteilung nach einem gerichtlichen Verfahren zur Duldung von Modernisierungsma\u00dfnahmen.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/tenancy-law-cause-to-bring-an-action-if-the-tenant-does-not-respond-to-the-landlords-request-to-carry-out-modernisation-measures-within-the-specified-period\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_GB\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mietrecht: Veranlassung zur Klageerhebung bei Nichtreaktion des Mieters auf die fristgebundene Aufforderung des Vermieters zu Modernisierungsma\u00dfnahmen\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Die Kostenverteilung nach einem gerichtlichen Verfahren zur Duldung von Modernisierungsma\u00dfnahmen.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/tenancy-law-cause-to-bring-an-action-if-the-tenant-does-not-respond-to-the-landlords-request-to-carry-out-modernisation-measures-within-the-specified-period\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei\u00a0Tieben\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/profile.php?id=100054481000178\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-10-13T14:05:24+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-08-25T13:11:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/Zivilrecht-1.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1200\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"600\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"helmer\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@mth_Tieben\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@mth_Tieben\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"helmer\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Estimated reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Tenancy law: Cause to bring an action if the tenant does not respond to the landlord's request for modernisation measures within the deadline","description":"The distribution of costs following court proceedings for the toleration of modernisation measures.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/tenancy-law-cause-to-bring-an-action-if-the-tenant-does-not-respond-to-the-landlords-request-to-carry-out-modernisation-measures-within-the-specified-period\/","og_locale":"en_GB","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mietrecht: Veranlassung zur Klageerhebung bei Nichtreaktion des Mieters auf die fristgebundene Aufforderung des Vermieters zu Modernisierungsma\u00dfnahmen","og_description":"Die Kostenverteilung nach einem gerichtlichen Verfahren zur Duldung von Modernisierungsma\u00dfnahmen.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/tenancy-law-cause-to-bring-an-action-if-the-tenant-does-not-respond-to-the-landlords-request-to-carry-out-modernisation-measures-within-the-specified-period\/","og_site_name":"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei\u00a0Tieben","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/profile.php?id=100054481000178","article_published_time":"2018-10-13T14:05:24+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-08-25T13:11:59+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1200,"height":600,"url":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/Zivilrecht-1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"helmer","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@mth_Tieben","twitter_site":"@mth_Tieben","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"helmer","Estimated reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-veranlassung-zur-klageerhebung-bei-nichtreaktion-des-mieters-auf-die-fristgebundene-aufforderung-des-vermieters-zu-modernisierungsmassnahmen\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-veranlassung-zur-klageerhebung-bei-nichtreaktion-des-mieters-auf-die-fristgebundene-aufforderung-des-vermieters-zu-modernisierungsmassnahmen\/"},"author":{"name":"helmer","@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/#\/schema\/person\/fbcf627706a8a6151cec2217af8c74b3"},"headline":"Mietrecht: Veranlassung zur Klageerhebung bei Nichtreaktion des Mieters auf die fristgebundene Aufforderung des Vermieters zu Modernisierungsma\u00dfnahmen","datePublished":"2018-10-13T14:05:24+00:00","dateModified":"2025-08-25T13:11:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-veranlassung-zur-klageerhebung-bei-nichtreaktion-des-mieters-auf-die-fristgebundene-aufforderung-des-vermieters-zu-modernisierungsmassnahmen\/"},"wordCount":1139,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-veranlassung-zur-klageerhebung-bei-nichtreaktion-des-mieters-auf-die-fristgebundene-aufforderung-des-vermieters-zu-modernisierungsmassnahmen\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/Zivilrecht-1.jpg","keywords":["Erhaltungsma\u00dfnahmen Modernisierungsma\u00dfnahmen Unterschied","Verteilung Kosten sofortiges Anerkenntnis Modernisierungsma\u00dfnahmen"],"articleSection":["Zivilrecht"],"inLanguage":"en-GB","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-veranlassung-zur-klageerhebung-bei-nichtreaktion-des-mieters-auf-die-fristgebundene-aufforderung-des-vermieters-zu-modernisierungsmassnahmen\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-veranlassung-zur-klageerhebung-bei-nichtreaktion-des-mieters-auf-die-fristgebundene-aufforderung-des-vermieters-zu-modernisierungsmassnahmen\/","url":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-veranlassung-zur-klageerhebung-bei-nichtreaktion-des-mieters-auf-die-fristgebundene-aufforderung-des-vermieters-zu-modernisierungsmassnahmen\/","name":"Tenancy law: Cause to bring an action if the tenant does not respond to the landlord's request for modernisation measures within the deadline","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-veranlassung-zur-klageerhebung-bei-nichtreaktion-des-mieters-auf-die-fristgebundene-aufforderung-des-vermieters-zu-modernisierungsmassnahmen\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-veranlassung-zur-klageerhebung-bei-nichtreaktion-des-mieters-auf-die-fristgebundene-aufforderung-des-vermieters-zu-modernisierungsmassnahmen\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/Zivilrecht-1.jpg","datePublished":"2018-10-13T14:05:24+00:00","dateModified":"2025-08-25T13:11:59+00:00","description":"The distribution of costs following court proceedings for the toleration of modernisation measures.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-veranlassung-zur-klageerhebung-bei-nichtreaktion-des-mieters-auf-die-fristgebundene-aufforderung-des-vermieters-zu-modernisierungsmassnahmen\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-GB","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-veranlassung-zur-klageerhebung-bei-nichtreaktion-des-mieters-auf-die-fristgebundene-aufforderung-des-vermieters-zu-modernisierungsmassnahmen\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-veranlassung-zur-klageerhebung-bei-nichtreaktion-des-mieters-auf-die-fristgebundene-aufforderung-des-vermieters-zu-modernisierungsmassnahmen\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/Zivilrecht-1.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/Zivilrecht-1.jpg","width":1200,"height":600,"caption":"Zivilrecht"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-veranlassung-zur-klageerhebung-bei-nichtreaktion-des-mieters-auf-die-fristgebundene-aufforderung-des-vermieters-zu-modernisierungsmassnahmen\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Zivilrecht","item":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/category\/mietrecht-rechtsanwalt\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Mietrecht: Veranlassung zur Klageerhebung bei Nichtreaktion des Mieters auf die fristgebundene Aufforderung des Vermieters zu Modernisierungsma\u00dfnahmen"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/","name":"Law firm Tieben","description":"Lawyer Tieben \/ Law firm Cologne","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/#organization","name":"Law firm Tieben","url":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/logo.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/logo.png","width":254,"height":52,"caption":"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei\u00a0Tieben"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/profile.php?id=100054481000178","https:\/\/x.com\/mth_Tieben","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/in\/helmer-tieben-09570226"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/#\/schema\/person\/fbcf627706a8a6151cec2217af8c74b3","name":"helmer","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f3308295754604f18007cf9e14e5984d1b864d3edea19e3681ff8c9354cd73e8?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f3308295754604f18007cf9e14e5984d1b864d3edea19e3681ff8c9354cd73e8?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f3308295754604f18007cf9e14e5984d1b864d3edea19e3681ff8c9354cd73e8?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"helmer"}}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5360","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5360"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5360\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7333,"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5360\/revisions\/7333"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/11961"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5360"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5360"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5360"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}