BGH rules Eigenbedarf eviction blocked after family GbR transfer; ten-year ban applies
Berlin court upholds tenant protection under §577a BGB after owner converted a rental building to condominium and transferred units to a family GbR, blocking an Eigenbedarf eviction. (dejure.org)
Strong opening: BGH affirms tenant protection against Eigenbedarf eviction
A Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) decision on January 21, 2026, confirmed that an Eigenbedarf eviction can be ineffective where rented apartments were converted to condominium ownership and then transferred into a family-run Gesellschaft bürgerlichen Rechts (GbR). The ruling concerned a Munich family that had split its multi-unit building into individual apartments and then moved those units into a GbR owned by the spouses and their adult children. (dejure.org)
Case details: Munich family, daughter’s intended use and disputed notice
In the case, the family’s daughter sought to move into one of the rented apartments for the purpose of vocational training, and the family GbR issued an Eigenbedarf termination to the sitting tenant. The tenant refused to vacate, and the dispute reached the BGH after lower courts weighed the competing interests of family use and statutory tenant protection. The BGH accepted that the daughter intended to occupy the flat but nonetheless held the termination invalid. (anwalt24.de)
Statutory basis: How §577a BGB limits Eigenbedarf claims
The ruling turned on §577a of the German Civil Code (BGB), which imposes a statutory ban on terminations for personal use following the conversion of rental housing into condominium ownership and its subsequent sale. That provision is designed to protect tenants from displacement resulting from restructuring and resale of formerly rented apartments. Under the statute, an acquirer is generally precluded from issuing an Eigenbedarf or similar termination for a fixed period after acquisition. (gesetze-im-internet.de)
Court’s interpretation: Transfer into a family GbR triggers the ban
The BGH held that the act of bringing already-converted, rented apartments into a family GbR constitutes a “disposition” within the meaning of §577a and thus triggers the statutory protection. The court rejected the argument that a family GbR should be treated like a private family transfer exempt from the ban in cases where the building has already been divided into condominium units. The judgment emphasizes that the legislature deliberately distinguished between transfers of undivided buildings and transfers of individual condominium units. (frey-schaefer-brandt.de)
Limits of the family exception: Whole-building transfers only
The statutory exception for family-owned partnerships applies only where an entire, undivided property is transferred to a family group — not where apartments have been converted to separate ownership before transfer. The BGH declined to extend the exception by analogy to post-conversion transfers into family GbRs, finding that doing so would undermine the tenant-protection purpose of §577a. This narrow reading means that owners who split properties into separate condominium units cannot rely on the family-company exception to bypass the prohibition. (zfir-online.de)
Practical effect: Three-year and ten-year ban in tight markets
Under §577a, the protection against termination generally lasts three years after the triggering transfer, but in municipalities with a strained housing market the statutory period can extend to ten years. The BGH decision confirms that the longer period applies where local market conditions warrant it, leaving families who restructure ownership in high-demand cities like Munich unable to pursue Eigenbedarf evictions for up to a decade. Landlords and family investors must therefore plan around these statutory time limits when restructuring property ownership. (gesetze-im-internet.de)
Guidance for owners and tenants after the ruling
For owners, the decision underscores the need for careful legal and timing considerations before converting rental properties into condominiums or reorganising ownership within family entities. Legal counsel should be sought to assess whether a planned transfer will trigger §577a consequences and whether alternative restructuring routes are available. Tenants receive reinforced protection: those in converted apartments transferred to family-run entities retain statutory safeguards against displacement for the applicable period. (goi-anwaelte.de)
The BGH judgment (Az. VIII ZR 247/24) aligns statutory text and legislative purpose, making clear that tenant protection under §577a BGB survives transfers into family GbRs when the subject matter has already been converted into separate condominium units. (dejure.org)
The ruling will likely prompt landlords, advisors and housing policymakers to revisit structuring strategies and to advise clients in stressed housing markets that family ties do not automatically remove the statutory shields that protect long-standing renters.
