Federal Court of Justice: Dilapidated buildings need to be refurbished

Too old, too dilapidated, renovation too expensive – some owner associations then let buildings fall into disrepair. That is not possible, decided the BGH. If individual owners want it, the property has to be renovated.

It’s about a parking garage in Augsburg that is more than 40 years old. It is in dire need of renovation. When the building authority requested proof of fire protection, the majority of the owners’ association decided that the parking garage should no longer be used. The majority of the owners don’t want to renovate it either: too expensive, they say. One of the co-owners – a GmbH – wants to continue renting its three floors to a hotel. She sued the decision – with success: the Federal Court of Justice approved her.

Obligation to renovate – if a part is used

Despite the high costs, the community of owners has to renovate the property, according to the chairwoman of the 5th Civil Senate Christina Stresemann. She referred to the previous case law of the Federal Court of Justice on residential property: “According to the case law of the Federal Court of Justice, apartment owners are obliged to remedy serious structural defects in communal property if these defects significantly impair the use of the private property or make it impossible.”

This means that if a community of owners lets a building fall into disrepair, this does not generally exempt them from the renovation obligation if individual owners want to continue to use their part of the property. It doesn’t matter if the property is completely run down and the renovation is correspondingly expensive.

No renovation obligation in the event of severe destruction

According to the Condominium Act, the obligation to renovate only does not apply if the building has been so badly destroyed that more than half of its value has been lost. “Destroyed” is to be understood literally – for example by a fire or a flood.

An economic total loss is not included, so BGH judge Stresemann: “According to normal usage, a building is only destroyed when its usability is completely or partially canceled, but not because its renovation causes high costs.”

The judgment is of fundamental importance. Because it also applies to run-down properties in which there are apartments. Here, too, the majority of owners cannot simply refuse renovation because they do not want to bear the costs.

File number: V ZR 225/20