Enlarge image
Thermal insulation with styrofoam: energy efficiency
Photo: Armin Weigel / picture alliance / dpa
An old building in Berlin can be insulated later, although the insulation then protrudes 16 centimeters onto the neighboring property.
This emerges from a decision by the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) in Karlsruhe.
According to the court, one is not convinced that the corresponding regulation in Berlin state law is unconstitutional.
The regulation allows, without more precise restrictions, to insulate existing buildings even if the insulation then protrudes beyond one's own property.
In principle, federal states are allowed to regulate subsequent thermal insulation, as the BGH decided last year.
However, other countries have more precise regulations than Berlin.
Doubts about property rights
In fact, the BGH doubted that the regulation is fully compatible with the fundamental right to property.
However, he did not submit the question to the Federal Constitutional Court.
Such a proposal presupposes that one is convinced that a norm is unconstitutional.
"This is not the case," declared the BGH.
The Berlin legislature deliberately refrained from making the provision more complicated.
It aims to save energy in existing buildings and is suitable and necessary for this.
It is therefore possible that the "generalizing approach" of the Berlin legislature is permissible to regulate the matter clearly and simply in order to enable as much insulation as possible - even if this could mean hardship for the neighbors.
The appeal of a neighbor from north-east Berlin was rejected.
Water damage verdict in September
In another dispute between two Cologne apartment owners, the BGH wants to rule in September.
It is about a house in which water damage has occurred several times, the reason was apparently defective pipes.
So far, the common building insurance paid for the damage, the remaining deductible was divided between the parties by the property management.
Since there was water damage so often, the insurance now only covers about a quarter of the costs and increased the deductible to 7500 euros.
The plaintiff no longer wants to pay any of this: after all, no water damage has occurred to her property so far, she argues.
Only those in whose homes the damage occurs should pay.
A landmark judgment is expected on September 16th.
rai/AFP
