"Sensible and comprehensible"

Can a landlord terminate a tenancy due to personal use if he only intends to use the property as a second home, and only for a few weeks a year? However difficult termination due to personal use may normally be, the legal situation here is clear: he is allowed to and he can.

The most recent and prominent case is the legal dispute involving a landlord living in Finland over the eviction of a tenant from his family's ancestral home in Wiesbaden. The landlord stated that he needed more space in the family home in Wiesbaden for family gatherings with his children and grandchildren. Therefore, he terminated the lease of the tenant of a five-room apartment on the second floor of the four-story building in a prime location, which is owned by his children.

The landlord argued that the attic apartment, previously used for the family's twice-yearly gatherings, was too small for six adults (three children plus spouses) and their six children. He also stated that the family was expecting four more grandchildren in the coming years. He further justified his need for the apartment by citing the family's special connection to Wiesbaden and their regular stays at the property, which had been in the family for generations. When the tenant refused to accept the termination notice, the landlord filed for eviction. The local court dismissed the suit, finding that the intended use of the apartment for only a few weeks a year did not constitute residential use as defined in Section 573 Paragraph 1 No. 2 of the German Civil Code (BGB). The landlord appealed – successfully: The regional court granted the eviction order.

The dispute went to the next instance, and the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) upheld the lower court's decision: The landlord's intended use of the apartment as a second home and vacation apartment constituted a legitimate need for personal use, regardless of whether the landlord or a close relative used the apartment as their primary residence. The reasons for the need for personal use were deemed "reasonable, comprehensible, and not an abuse of rights." Even temporary use of the apartment fulfilled the requirements of "needing" the premises and was therefore grounds for termination of the tenancy due to personal use. Furthermore, it was not the court's role to judge what level of housing the landlord considered appropriate for themselves and their family members. BGH, Decision of August 21, 2018, Case No.: VIII ZR 186/1

Sources: haus-und-grund-bonn.de, haufe.de, jurion.de, juris.bundesgerichtshof.de, anwalt.de.