{"id":871,"date":"2026-09-27T17:17:53","date_gmt":"2026-09-27T17:17:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/rechtsanwaltsblog\/?p=871"},"modified":"2026-09-28T08:39:28","modified_gmt":"2026-09-28T08:39:28","slug":"mietrecht-mieter-tragt-die-darlegungs-und-beweislast-fur-einen-schadensersatzanspruch-hinsichtlich-der-betriebskostenabrechnung","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/tenancy-law-tenant-bears-the-burden-of-presentation-and-proof-for-a-claim-for-damages-with-regard-to-the-statement-of-operating-costs\/","title":{"rendered":"Cost-effectiveness requirement in the cost accounting for operations: Who has to prove what?"},"content":{"rendered":"<section id=\"hero\" data-elementor=\"hero\">\n<p class=\"lead\">In short: Anyone who claims that the landlord has violated the economic viability requirement must demonstrate and prove the breach of duty and the resulting damage. The landlord is not required to disclose his calculation of the costs himself on a regular basis. The complaint must also be made within the twelve-month period.<\/p>\n<p>The basis is the case law of the Federal Court of Justice, in particular the judgment of 6 July 2011 (VIII ZR 340\/10) and the judgment of 20 May 2026 (VIII ZR 6\/24). In the following we explain what tenants have to present in concrete terms, what the role of the evidence review is, and why nationwide average values do not help in court.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"auf-einen-blick\" class=\"mth-fact-box\" data-elementor=\"auf-einen-blick\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Auf_einen_Blick\"><\/span>At a glance<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<ul class=\"mth-checklist\">\n<li><strong>Legal basis:<\/strong>\u00a0The economic efficiency requirement is set out in Section 556(3), Sentence 1, Subclause 2 of the German Civil Code. A breach constitutes a claim for damages under Section 280(1), Section 241(2) of the German Civil Code, with the reimbursement or waiving of the unnecessary costs.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Proof burden:<\/strong>\u00a0The tenant must prove and demonstrate the breach of duty and the damage. With regard to liability, the landlord must, if necessary, prove their own fault in accordance with Section 280(1), Sentence 2 of the German Civil Code.<\/li>\n<li><strong>No automatic secondary evidentiary burden:<\/strong>\u00a0The landlord is not regularly required to explain in more detail the actual basis for his cost calculation (BGH, VIII ZR 340\/10; confirmed by VIII ZR 6\/24).<\/li>\n<li><strong>Scale:<\/strong>\u00a0It is not market-oriented, objectively inflated costs that are decisive. The fact that the landlord did not obtain any comparable offers is not sufficient on its own (BGH, VIII ZR 6\/24).<\/li>\n<li><strong>First:<\/strong>\u00a0This objection must also be raised in principle within twelve months of the receipt of the invoice (\u00a7 556, paragraph 3, sentence 5 and 6, BGB; BGH, VIII ZR 6\/24).<\/li>\n<li><strong>Access to vouchers:<\/strong>\u00a0It is the most important way to access the facts. The right of access also includes payment receipts (BGH, VIII ZR 118\/19).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"grundsatz\" data-elementor=\"grundsatz\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Das_Wirtschaftlichkeitsgebot_als_vertragliche_Nebenpflicht\"><\/span>The cost-effectiveness requirement as a contractual subsidiary obligation<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>After\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.gesetze-im-internet.de\/bgb\/__556.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Section 556, paragraph 3, sentence 1, sub-clause 2 of the BGB<\/a>\u00a0The landlord must observe the principle of cost-effectiveness when calculating operating costs. He must take into account an appropriate cost-benefit ratio when making decisions that affect the amount of costs incurred.<\/p>\n<p>The Federal Court of Justice has since the judgment of 28 November 2007 (VIII ZR 243\/06) classified this obligation as a contractual accessory obligation. Therefore, if the charge of operating costs has been agreed upon, a breach does not lead to the entire bill being invalid. The tenant, on the other hand, has a claim for damages, which is directed at the reimbursement of the unnecessary costs or the exemption from them. The BGH has recently reaffirmed this in the judgment of 20 May 2026 (VIII ZR 6\/24).<\/p>\n<p>A breach can take various forms: inflated prices, non-required services, excessive quantities, or a frequency of service that is not appropriate for the property. An unfavorable contract that the landlord entered into before the lease was concluded alone does not constitute a breach; however, a breach is considered to exist if the landlord does not take advantage of an opportunity to rectify the situation (BGH, judgment of January 25, 2023, VIII ZR 230\/21). It is a prerequisite that an adjustment or termination of the contract was actually possible and economically reasonable.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"beweislast\" data-elementor=\"beweislast\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Darlegungs-_und_Beweislast_Was_Mieter_und_Vermieter_vortragen_mussen\"><\/span>Evidence and proof: What tenants and landlords must present<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>Because this is a claim for damages, the general rules apply. The tenant must present the facts and, in the event of a dispute, prove the breach of duty and the damage that resulted. In the case of fault, the burden of proof shifts to the tenant.\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.gesetze-im-internet.de\/bgb\/__280.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">\u00a7 280, paragraph 1, sentence 2, BGB<\/a>\u00a0The burden of proof: If a breach of duty is established, the landlord must prove that he or she is not responsible for it.<\/p>\n<div class=\"mth-table-wrap\">\n<table class=\"mth-comparison-table\">\n<caption>Who has to present and prove something?<\/caption>\n<thead>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"col\">Point<\/th>\n<th scope=\"col\">Responsible<\/th>\n<th scope=\"col\">Basis<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"row\">Uneconomic cost calculation (breach of duty)<\/th>\n<td>Tenant<\/td>\n<td>General rules; BGH VIII ZR 340\/10<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"row\">Amount of avoidable additional costs (damage)<\/th>\n<td>Tenant<\/td>\n<td>General rules<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"row\">No fault of the victim<\/th>\n<td>Landlord (relief)<\/td>\n<td>\u00a7 280, paragraph 1, sentence 2, BGB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"row\">Proper billing and access to invoices upon request<\/th>\n<td>Landlord<\/td>\n<td>Section 556, Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the German Civil Code<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"row\">Actual creation of the invoiced costs and their eligibility for reimbursement under the rental agreement<\/th>\n<td>Landlord<\/td>\n<td>General rules; \u00a7 556, paragraph 1, BGB<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"row\">More details on our own calculation<\/th>\n<td>Landlords only on an exceptional basis<\/td>\n<td>BGH VIII ZR 340\/10; VIII ZR 6\/24<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"row\">Timely objection<\/th>\n<td>Tenant<\/td>\n<td>Section 556, paragraph 3, sentences 5 and 6 of the German Civil Code<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Warum_der_Vermieter_seine_Kalkulation_regelmasig_nicht_offenlegen_muss\"><\/span>Why the landlord does not have to disclose his calculation regularly<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>A secondary burden of proof applies to a party only under general principles if the other party does not know the relevant circumstances, while the latter itself knows the facts and more detailed information is reasonable. This situation is not usually present when examining a utility bill calculation under the German Supreme Court (BGH). It is a matter of objective circumstances such as fees set by notice, customary charges for a caretaker or market prices for services and fuels. These can be determined by the tenant himself, and he obtains the billing basis from the bill review (<a href=\"https:\/\/juris.bundesgerichtshof.de\/cgi-bin\/rechtsprechung\/document.py?Gericht=bgh&amp;Art=pm&amp;Datum=2011-7&amp;nr=56774&amp;linked=urt&amp;Blank=1&amp;file=dokument.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">BGH, Judgment of 06.07.2011, VIII ZR 340\/10<\/a>).<\/p>\n<p>This does not mean that the landlord can remain silent: he must properly invoice and, upon request, provide access to the documents. Furthermore, he must explain and prove that the invoiced costs actually occurred and are eligible for reimbursement under the rental agreement. However, there is no further requirement, such as presenting a price comparison or substantiating his decisions regarding the assignment, simply because the tenant raises doubts. The Supreme Court confirmed in its judgment of May 20, 2026 that a secondary burden of proof does not automatically arise.<\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Darlegen_ist_nicht_dasselbe_wie_beweisen\"><\/span>Presenting is not the same as proving<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>There are two distinct steps. First, the tenant must present specific facts that could constitute a violation. Only when the landlord disputes these facts does the burden of proof shift to the tenant, for example through offers, price lists, witnesses, or an expert report. At the same time, the requirements for the tenant\u2019s presentation must not be overly broad (BGH, judgment of 17 December 2014, XII ZR 170\/13, paragraph 13).<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"fall-2011\" data-elementor=\"fall-2011\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Der_Fall_von_2011_Mullgebuhren_und_der_Betriebskostenspiegel\"><\/span>The 2011 case: garbage fees and the cost of operating the facility<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The landlord of an apartment in Heidelberg calculated the operating costs for the year 2007 in November 2008. The tenants paid \u20ac525.71 in garbage disposal fees. The tenants considered this amount excessive and referred to the \u201eOperating Cost Index for Germany\u201c of the German Tenants\u2019 Association, which showed \u20ac185.76 for a comparable apartment. They demanded the refund of the difference of \u20ac339.95 and retained part of the January 2009 rent, their legal costs of \u20ac99.60 from the February rent.<\/p>\n<p>The landlord sued for payment of the withheld rent and prevailed in all instances. The tenants\u2019 counterclaims were unsuccessful; their appeal and their revision remained unsuccessful. The BGH found that the tenants had not established a breach of duty. The appeals court had also argued with a graduated burden of proof. The BGH upheld the result, but made it clear that the landlord regularly did not bear any secondary burden of proof for the basis of his cost calculation.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"betriebskostenspiegel\" data-elementor=\"betriebskostenspiegel\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Warum_bundesweite_Durchschnittswerte_nicht_genugen\"><\/span>Why nationwide averages are not sufficient<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The operating cost index provides regional averages. However, operating costs depend heavily on local fees, price levels, and the specific characteristics of the building. Therefore, a deviation from the average does not indicate whether the landlord had a more favorable option in the specific location. However, comparing the two is nevertheless useful as a reason to examine the billing more closely and request access to supporting documentation.<\/p>\n<div class=\"mth-fact-box\">\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Beispiel_fiktiv\"><\/span>Example (fictitious)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>A tenant in Cologne notes that the home maintenance costs are significantly above the national average. This alone is not enough to make a difference. He demands access to the invoices and learns that the service provider maintains the property on a weekly basis with a fixed scope of work. He then obtains two offers from Cologne companies for the same scope of work, the same frequency, and the same period, which are significantly more favorable, and points out that the landlord\u2019s contract could have been terminated. This statement refers to a service actually available and comparable in scope and may constitute a violation.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"konkret-vortragen\" data-elementor=\"konkret-vortragen\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Wie_Sie_einen_Verstos_konkret_begrunden_konnen\"><\/span>How to concretely substantiate a violation<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>Depending on the nature of the violation, different approaches are possible. This is not a checklist that must be fully met in every case:<\/p>\n<ul class=\"mth-checklist\">\n<li><strong>Unmarketable prices:<\/strong>\u00a0Comparison offers or price lists for the same service at the same location. According to the BGH, it matters that the service was commissioned at an objectively overpriced price and that a comparison would actually have led to savings (VIII ZR 6\/24).<\/li>\n<li><strong>Non-required services:<\/strong>\u00a0Proof that a paid-for service for the property was not necessary.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Excessive amounts or frequency:<\/strong>\u00a0for example, too large trash cans or cleaning that is too frequent for the building.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Corrections not made:<\/strong>\u00a0The landlord does not resort to a possible termination or renegotiation of an unfavorable contract (VIII ZR 230\/21).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Comparisons must be relevant to the facts: the same billing period, the same scope of services, comparable quality, and an alternative that was actually available to the landlord. The fact that the landlord did not seek out comparison offers is not in itself sufficient.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"frist-belegeinsicht\" data-elementor=\"frist-belegeinsicht\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Einwendungsfrist_und_Belegeinsicht\"><\/span>Time limit for use and access to supporting documents<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Die_Zwolfmonatsfrist_gilt_auch_fur_diesen_Einwand\"><\/span>The twelve-month period applies to this objection as well.<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The tenant must inform the landlord of objections to the bill no later than the end of the twelfth month after receipt of the bill (\u00a7 556, paragraph 3, sentence 5, BGB). Thereafter, they are excluded unless the tenant is not responsible for the delayed enforcement (\u00a7 556, paragraph 3, sentence 6, BGB). The BGH ruled in a judgment of May 20, 2026 that this exclusion of objections applies in principle also to the objection that the landlord violated the economic principle (<a href=\"https:\/\/dejure.org\/dienste\/vernetzung\/rechtsprechung?Gericht=BGH&amp;Datum=20.05.2026&amp;Aktenzeichen=VIII+ZR+6%2F24\" rel=\"noopener\">VIII ZR 6\/24<\/a>).<\/p>\n<p>The exception to this is statute of limitations. Claims for restitution generally expire after three years (\u00a7\u00a7 195, 199 BGB). However, the statute of limitations does not replace the limitation period: anyone who lets the twelve months elapse cannot, on a regular basis, claim the violation even within the limitation period.<\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Belegeinsicht_als_Grundlage_des_Vortrags\"><\/span>Evidence insight as the basis of the lecture<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>For residential premises, \u00a7 556, paragraph 4, of the German Civil Code (BGB) regulates the tenant\u2019s right to inspect the billing documents, including the possibility of providing them electronically. The right of inspection also extends to the underlying payment documents; the tenant does not have to demonstrate a special interest in this (BGH, judgment of 09.12.2020, VIII ZR 118\/19). On the other hand, the right of inspection does not constitute a basis for a claim for disclosure of all internal considerations of the landlord regarding the assignment of the contract.<\/p>\n<p>In-depth information on deadlines and documentation requirements:\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/tenancy-law-flat-rate-denial-of-the-correctness-of-the-operating-cost-statement-without-inspection-is-not-sufficient\/\">Disputing utility bills: deadlines, receipts and objections<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"gewerbe\" data-elementor=\"gewerbe\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Und_im_Gewerbemietrecht\"><\/span>And in commercial lease law?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The economic efficiency principle also applies to commercial lease agreements, although \u00a7 556 of the German Civil Code is not directly applicable there. The XII Civil Chamber of the German Supreme Court has confirmed that the commercial tenant must also prove a violation (judgment of 17 December 2014, XII ZR 170\/13). However, the twelve-month period under \u00a7 556(3) of the German Civil Code does not apply in the commercial sector. More about this in our article.\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/commercial-lease-law-service-charge-statement\/\">Service charge statement in commercial tenancy law: deadlines, receipts and audit<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"praxis\" data-elementor=\"praxis\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Vorgehen_in_der_Praxis\"><\/span>Action in practice<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<ol class=\"mth-process\">\n<li><strong>Note the date of billing.<\/strong>\u00a0From this day onwards, the twelve-month period begins.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Mark the conspicuous positions.<\/strong>\u00a0What costs are unusually high compared to previous years or the property itself?<\/li>\n<li><strong>Require proof of access.<\/strong>\u00a0In writing and verifiable, including contracts, invoices, and payment receipts.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Compare locally.<\/strong>\u00a0Obtain offers or prices for the same scope of services at the same location.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Formulate the objection in concrete terms.<\/strong>\u00a0Position, amount complained of and justification in writing, within the deadline.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Have a success probability check done,<\/strong>\u00a0before you cut payments or add them up.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"faq\" data-elementor=\"faq-accordion\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Haufige_Fragen\"><\/span>Frequently asked questions<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<div class=\"mth-faq\">\n<div class=\"mth-faq-item\">\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Muss_ich_beweisen_dass_der_Vermieter_schuldhaft_gehandelt_hat\"><\/span>Do I have to prove that the landlord acted culpably?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>No. You must prove the breach of duty and the damage. If the breach of duty is established, the landlord must exonerate himself under \u00a7 280, paragraph 1, sentence 2 of the German Civil Code (BGB), if he believes that he is not responsible for it.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"mth-faq-item\">\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Muss_der_Vermieter_erklaren_warum_er_einen_bestimmten_Dienstleister_beauftragt_hat\"><\/span>Does the landlord have to explain why he has appointed a particular service provider?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Not regularly. He must properly account for his expenses and provide access to invoices. He is only required to disclose his calculations in exceptional circumstances (BGH, VIII ZR 340\/10 and VIII ZR 6\/24).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"mth-faq-item\">\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Liegt_ein_Verstos_vor_wenn_der_Vermieter_keine_Vergleichsangebote_eingeholt_hat\"><\/span>Is there a breach if the landlord did not seek out comparable offers?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Not only that. According to the BGH judgment of 20 May 2026 (VIII ZR 6\/24), it depends on whether the service was commissioned at non-market-oriented, objectively inflated prices, and whether the comparison offers had actually led to savings.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"mth-faq-item\">\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Darf_ich_die_Nachzahlung_zuruckhalten_wenn_ich_die_Kosten_fur_uberhoht_halte\"><\/span>Can I withhold the additional payment if I consider the costs to be excessive?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Doubts alone do not justify this. If the landlord refuses to provide the evidence requested, you may temporarily withhold the additional payment until the evidence is provided. This is distinct from offsetting a claim for damages: it requires that the violation actually exists \u2013 in the case of 2011, this offsetting failed.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"mth-faq-item\">\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Was_hat_sich_durch_das_BGH-Urteil_von_2026_geandert\"><\/span>What has changed as a result of the BGH ruling of 2026?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The judgment of 20 May 2026 (VIII ZR 6\/24) confirms the 2011 line and supplements it: The objection is subject to the twelve-month period; the lack of comparable offers alone does not constitute a breach; objectively inflated prices are decisive, and a secondary burden of proof on the part of the landlord does not automatically arise.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"cta\" class=\"mth-cta-section\" data-elementor=\"cta\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Sie_halten_Ihre_Betriebskosten_fur_unwirtschaftlich\"><\/span>Do you consider your operating costs to be uneconomical?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>We review your billing, follow up on the documentation you provide, and formulate your objection in a timely manner. We advise landlords on billing and handling complaints. For a non-binding contact, you can reach us by phone, email, or using the contact form.<\/p>\n<ul class=\"mth-contact\">\n<li><strong>Telephone:<\/strong>\u00a0<a href=\"tel:+4922180187670\">0221 - 801 87 670<\/a><\/li>\n<li><strong>E-Mail:<\/strong>\u00a0<a href=\"mailto:info@mth-partner.de\">info@mth-partner.de<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Law firm Tieben<\/strong><br \/>\nSachsenring 34<br \/>\n50677 Cologne<\/p>\n<p><a class=\"mth-cta-primary\" href=\"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/contact\/\">Request advice<\/a><\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"verwandte-beitraege\" data-elementor=\"verwandte-beitraege\">\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Weiterlesen\"><\/span>Read more<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<ul class=\"mth-checklist\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/tenancy-law-flat-rate-denial-of-the-correctness-of-the-operating-cost-statement-without-inspection-is-not-sufficient\/\">Disputing utility bills: deadlines, receipts and objections<\/a>\u00a0\u2013 Proofing and substantiation of the denial in the case of residential space.<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/commercial-lease-law-service-charge-statement\/\">Service charge statement in commercial tenancy law: deadlines, receipts and audit<\/a>\u00a0\u2013 the special features for commercial tenants.<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/services\/tenancy-law\/\">Tenancy law in Cologne<\/a>\u00a0\u2013 Advice and representation in residential and commercial lease law.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"autor\" data-elementor=\"autor-hinweise\">\n<div class=\"mth-author\">\n<p><strong>Author:<\/strong>\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/team-2\/attorney-at-law-tieben\/\">Lawyer Helmer Tieben<\/a>, Master of International Tax, University of Melbourne; admitted since 2005. Office address: Sachsenring 34, 50677 Cologne.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Jurisdiction:<\/strong>\u00a0September 2026, taking into account the BGH judgment of 20.05.2026, VIII ZR 6\/24. Originally published in 2011, fundamentally revised in 2026.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"mth-disclaimer\">\n<p><em>This article provides a general overview and does not replace a legal assessment of the individual case.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The success of a court hearing also depends to a large extent on which party has the burden of presentation and proof for a fact that is relevant to the decision and whether the party succeeds in proving it. This also applies to disputes regarding utility bills.<\/p>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":14580,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[43],"tags":[979,2528,1917,1939],"class_list":["post-871","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-mietrecht-rechtsanwalt","tag-grundsatz-der-wirtschaftlichkeit","tag-rechtsanwalt-koeln-eigenbedarfskuendigung","tag-wucher-gewerbliches-mietrecht","tag-zugesicherte-eigenschaften-mietrecht"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v28.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Mietrecht: Mieter tr\u00e4gt die Darlegungs- und Beweislast f\u00fcr einen Schadensersatzanspruch hinsichtlich der Betriebskostenabrechnung<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Gem. \u00a7 556 Abs. 3 BGB ist bei der Betriebskostenabrechnung der Grundsatz der Wirtschaftlichkeit zu beachten.\" \/>\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-tenant-bears-the-burden-of-presentation-and-proof-for-a-claim-for-damages-with-regard-to-the-statement-of-operating-costs\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_GB\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mietrecht: Mieter tr\u00e4gt die Darlegungs- und Beweislast f\u00fcr einen Schadensersatzanspruch hinsichtlich der Betriebskostenabrechnung\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Gem. \u00a7 556 Abs. 3 BGB ist bei der Betriebskostenabrechnung der Grundsatz der Wirtschaftlichkeit zu beachten.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/tenancy-law-tenant-bears-the-burden-of-presentation-and-proof-for-a-claim-for-damages-with-regard-to-the-statement-of-operating-costs\/\" \/>\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=\"2026-09-27T17:17:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-09-28T08:39:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/wirtschaftlichkeitsgebot-betriebskosten-beweislast.webp\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1672\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"941\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/webp\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\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=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Estimated reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Tenancy law: Tenant bears the burden of presentation and proof for a claim for damages with regard to the statement of operating costs","description":"In accordance with Section 556 (3) BGB, the principle of economic efficiency must be observed when settling operating costs.","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-tenant-bears-the-burden-of-presentation-and-proof-for-a-claim-for-damages-with-regard-to-the-statement-of-operating-costs\/","og_locale":"en_GB","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mietrecht: Mieter tr\u00e4gt die Darlegungs- und Beweislast f\u00fcr einen Schadensersatzanspruch hinsichtlich der Betriebskostenabrechnung","og_description":"Gem. \u00a7 556 Abs. 3 BGB ist bei der Betriebskostenabrechnung der Grundsatz der Wirtschaftlichkeit zu beachten.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/tenancy-law-tenant-bears-the-burden-of-presentation-and-proof-for-a-claim-for-damages-with-regard-to-the-statement-of-operating-costs\/","og_site_name":"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei\u00a0Tieben","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/profile.php?id=100054481000178","article_published_time":"2026-09-27T17:17:53+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-09-28T08:39:28+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1672,"height":941,"url":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/wirtschaftlichkeitsgebot-betriebskosten-beweislast.webp","type":"image\/webp"}],"author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@mth_Tieben","twitter_site":"@mth_Tieben","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Estimated reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-mieter-tragt-die-darlegungs-und-beweislast-fur-einen-schadensersatzanspruch-hinsichtlich-der-betriebskostenabrechnung\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-mieter-tragt-die-darlegungs-und-beweislast-fur-einen-schadensersatzanspruch-hinsichtlich-der-betriebskostenabrechnung\/"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/#\/schema\/person\/5dc7cf455de54130946e3cac97f5dfbd"},"headline":"Wirtschaftlichkeitsgebot bei der Betriebskostenabrechnung: Wer muss was beweisen?","datePublished":"2026-09-27T17:17:53+00:00","dateModified":"2026-09-28T08:39:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-mieter-tragt-die-darlegungs-und-beweislast-fur-einen-schadensersatzanspruch-hinsichtlich-der-betriebskostenabrechnung\/"},"wordCount":2125,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-mieter-tragt-die-darlegungs-und-beweislast-fur-einen-schadensersatzanspruch-hinsichtlich-der-betriebskostenabrechnung\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/wirtschaftlichkeitsgebot-betriebskosten-beweislast.webp","keywords":["Grundsatz der Wirtschaftlichkeit","Rechtsanwalt K\u00f6ln Eigenbedarfsk\u00fcndigung","Wucher gewerbliches Mietrecht","zugesicherte Eigenschaften Mietrecht"],"articleSection":["Zivilrecht"],"inLanguage":"en-GB","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-mieter-tragt-die-darlegungs-und-beweislast-fur-einen-schadensersatzanspruch-hinsichtlich-der-betriebskostenabrechnung\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-mieter-tragt-die-darlegungs-und-beweislast-fur-einen-schadensersatzanspruch-hinsichtlich-der-betriebskostenabrechnung\/","url":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-mieter-tragt-die-darlegungs-und-beweislast-fur-einen-schadensersatzanspruch-hinsichtlich-der-betriebskostenabrechnung\/","name":"Tenancy law: Tenant bears the burden of presentation and proof for a claim for damages with regard to the statement of operating costs","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-mieter-tragt-die-darlegungs-und-beweislast-fur-einen-schadensersatzanspruch-hinsichtlich-der-betriebskostenabrechnung\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-mieter-tragt-die-darlegungs-und-beweislast-fur-einen-schadensersatzanspruch-hinsichtlich-der-betriebskostenabrechnung\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/wirtschaftlichkeitsgebot-betriebskosten-beweislast.webp","datePublished":"2026-09-27T17:17:53+00:00","dateModified":"2026-09-28T08:39:28+00:00","description":"In accordance with Section 556 (3) BGB, the principle of economic efficiency must be observed when settling operating costs.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-mieter-tragt-die-darlegungs-und-beweislast-fur-einen-schadensersatzanspruch-hinsichtlich-der-betriebskostenabrechnung\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-GB","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-mieter-tragt-die-darlegungs-und-beweislast-fur-einen-schadensersatzanspruch-hinsichtlich-der-betriebskostenabrechnung\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-mieter-tragt-die-darlegungs-und-beweislast-fur-einen-schadensersatzanspruch-hinsichtlich-der-betriebskostenabrechnung\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/wirtschaftlichkeitsgebot-betriebskosten-beweislast.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/wirtschaftlichkeitsgebot-betriebskosten-beweislast.webp","width":1672,"height":941,"caption":"Betriebskostenabrechnung mit Taschenrechner, Mieter- und Vermieterakten sowie Waage"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/mietrecht-mieter-tragt-die-darlegungs-und-beweislast-fur-einen-schadensersatzanspruch-hinsichtlich-der-betriebskostenabrechnung\/#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":"Wirtschaftlichkeitsgebot bei der Betriebskostenabrechnung: Wer muss was beweisen?"}]},{"@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\/5dc7cf455de54130946e3cac97f5dfbd","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e5cd6a082a9610122b683548f09817f169e693adf042f28428cbf76b1ca03d2c?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e5cd6a082a9610122b683548f09817f169e693adf042f28428cbf76b1ca03d2c?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e5cd6a082a9610122b683548f09817f169e693adf042f28428cbf76b1ca03d2c?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin"}}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/871","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\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=871"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/871\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":14582,"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/871\/revisions\/14582"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/14580"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=871"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=871"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=871"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}