Corrections regarding lessors’ claims for damages: Colored wall paint and invalid provisions on cosmetic repairs
In its judgment of 15.09.2023 (Case No. 32 C 265/23 [19]), the Hanau Local Court rendered a decision relevant to practice regarding the assertion of claims for damages by landlords after the termination of a tenancy. The central question in the dispute was the extent to which landlords can demand compensation from their former tenants when the rented property is returned painted in conspicuous colors, and the contract contains an invalid clause on cosmetic repairs.
Initial situation: Color design of rental premises upon return
In the present case, the tenants left the apartment with walls in striking, bold colors, including navy blue, mint green, and purple. The rental agreement contained a clause obliging the tenants to carry out all cosmetic repairs. After the property was returned, the landlord demanded compensation for the painter’s costs for repainting all the walls, arguing that the color design had caused additional work to restore the original state.
Legal assessment of the cosmetic repairs clause
The local court first examined the validity of the standard cosmetic repairs clause in the rental agreement. It denied its validity as the lease apparently contained a so-called “fixed deadline provision,” which, according to established case law, is invalid. As a result, the obligation to carry out cosmetic repairs upon return of the rented property no longer rested solely with the tenants, but remained with the landlord.
Effects of invalidity on compensation claims
As the cosmetic repairs clause was deemed invalid, the landlord could not require the departing tenant to cover the painting costs in full. Nevertheless, the court clarified that an obligation to return the property in a neutral condition exists if the use of unusually prominent colors significantly impedes re-letting the property. Therefore, individual assessments must be made in each case.
Compensation claims when property is returned in dark or bright colors
The local court stated that a claim for damages may be justified if the rental premises are painted in such striking or dark colors that the need for renovation upon a new tenancy exceeds the usual level expected from normal use. This applies particularly if a ‘typical’ paint job (e.g., in white or subdued tones) would allow immediate reletting, whereas intense color deviations would necessitate interim renovation.
Determining the extent of compensation owed
Specifically, the court limited the claim for damages to the additional costs incurred due to the unusual choice of colors. It only awarded the landlord a reduced claim for the extra costs resulting from the increased effort required to paint over the bright colors. The total costs for repainting all the walls—which might have been awarded had the cosmetic repairs clause been valid—were not granted.
Significance for practice: Contracts and settlement of tenancy agreements
The decision highlights to what extent the specific design of contractual clauses and the individual use of a rented property significantly influence subsequent compensation claims. Thus, the obligation to restore the property to a re-lettable condition remains with regard to conspicuous paintwork, but without exceeding the boundaries of Section 535 BGB and the Federal Court of Justice’s requirements for renovation clauses. Considering the multitude of standard and customized leases, parties are advised to carefully review rules on cosmetic repairs to avoid potential disputes upon return of the property.
Further notes and legal uncertainties
The decision refers to a specific case and emphasizes that the individual circumstances must always be taken into account. Both parties to a tenancy should note that even implied or verbal agreements, handling of signs of use, and specific requirements regarding the condition of the rental property at the end of the contract can impact potential compensation claims.
Source reference
The description and assessment provided are based on the published judgment of the Hanau Local Court (Case No. 32 C 265/23 [19]), available at https://urteile.news/AG-Hanau_32-C-26523_Geringerer-Schadensersatz-des-Vermieters-fuer-farbige-Waende-bei-unwirksamer-Schoenheitsreparaturenklausel~N35411. The further comments reflect the current prevailing view in case law and literature as of June 2024.
In cases of uncertainty regarding the drafting and interpretation of tenancy agreement provisions as well as the assertion and settlement of claims for damages, it is advisable to seek sound legal advice. The lawyers at MTR Legal are available to provide extensive information based on their comprehensive experience.
