GER: Federal Court Clarifies Landlords’ Owner-Occupancy Rights

Oct 17, 2025 Benn-Ibler Rechtsanwälte

The German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof, hereinafter BGH) addressed the boundaries of termination on grounds of personal use. The central issue was whether a landlord may assert personal use when intending to renovate their own apartment for subsequent sale, but, during the interim period, seeks to personally occupy the currently rented apartment.

In the case at hand, the plaintiff resided in a fourth-floor apartment which he intended to connect to the attic for the purpose of subsequently selling the property. To achieve this, he served notice to the defendant occupying an identically configured apartment on the third floor, expressing the intention to relocate there himself. After evaluating evidence pertaining to the claimed personal use, the district court granted the plaintiff’s claim for eviction and surrender of the apartment. However, upon appeal by the defendant, the regional court reversed the initial decision and dismissed the action, reasoning that the landlord’s motive was primarily to facilitate the sale rather than demonstrating a genuine need for personal use.

The BGH provided clarification as follows:

A landlord may only terminate a tenancy agreement in accordance with standard procedures if a legitimate interest in termination can be demonstrated. Such a legitimate interest typically arises when the landlord requires the apartment for personal use, or for the use of family members or members of their household. It is not necessary for the landlord or a family member to be completely dependent on the premises for the requirement of need to be met. According to the BGH, personal use is established if the landlord intends to alter their living situation via renovation or sale plans, thereby necessitating occupation of the rented property. The decisive criterion is that the landlord’s intent to utilize the property must appear genuine and reasonable.

Courts should refrain from imposing their own perspectives regarding suitable housing over the landlord’s intended plans. Termination on the grounds of utilization does not apply in this instance, as it concerns the landlord’s former unit rather than the leased apartment. Furthermore, personal use cannot be refused simply because the owner's living situation would not be substantially altered by the relocation.

The case has been remanded to the court of appeals for further consideration.

BGH VIII ZR 289/23 (24 September 2025)