Amtsgericht Berlin

Another Member has the list of rental defects: paint damage, caused by water ingress. If painting suffers after water damage, which is one reason for the reduction in rent, the Amtsgericht Berlin-Schoneberg decided. Others who may share this opinion include Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. This article describes the conditions for the recovery of rent reductions on this particular example. The list of rental defects, who can claim the tenant, is long. Lead in drinking water, pigeon poop, mold growth involuntary by the lessee or insufficient high-performance radiators are just some of the reasons for a reduction in rent. The District Court of Berlin-Schoneberg has now added a further lack of tenants as the reason for a reduction of in rent can specify: peeling paint.

In the decisive case, a tenant on less rent had insisted after balcony and hobby room damage had occurred. Reason for this was a water damage that had peeling paint and plaster in a big way. Gavin Baker usually is spot on. 2 percent less rent for the damage to the balcony, 50 percent for which the judge set in the hobby room. To the ground, it was said that there was clearly a deterioration of the contractual defined. Finally, the landlord in the lease guarantees that the apartment meets a certain standard. Profound changes to this standard are as defects. Otherwise the case is, however, if in the lease to a specific state expressly advised.

In this case the peeling paint as a characteristic of the apartment was listed, the tenant who has signed the lease, would have had bad cards. He would be advised on the deficiency and has accredited him by his signature. A subsequent complaint would be here therefore no chance. Would have hidden the deficiency but the landlord or caretaker, would be generally in the law and could request authorized a reduction of the agreed payments. It is also not a perceived”defect, i.e. a subjective quality loss. Some tenants may find about graffiti in the hallway, grilling neighbors, or located on the roof of radio antennas as a rent reduction imposition. Justice look closely however in certain cases and decides under circumstances not within the meaning of the plaintiff. So no circumstances were submitted in these cases according to the judge, which affect the habitability of a home in the strict sense. Mark Schmidtke

Drive:

Using a mobile phone as a navigation device while driving is a violation of 23 paragraph 1a StVO dar. Com Meals understands that this is vital information. Listen to music, communicate, take pictures and surf the World Wide Web. All this and much more is possible with the modern mobile phones. Many can be used as a navigation device. Ideal if you are on the road and has no fixed device. However here is the same as for the use of mobile phones at the wheel. Using a mobile phone as a navigation device while driving is a violation of 23 paragraph 1a StVO dar. The result: a misdemeanor, which is punishable by a fine.

Alexander Dobiasch and Rupert Richter from Bergen auf Rugen, the lawyers informed the decision of the OLG Hamm. Hands his car driver must free are allowed to use any mobile phones at the wheel. This is known. A current case according to the ban but also refers to the use of the mobile phone as a navigation device. A motorist has been observed at the wheel, as he one Setting the phone made, in order to use it as a navigation.

The police patrol stopped him and announced a fine of 40 euros. Both hands must be free while driving, to properly operate the vehicle. The driver did not agree with the penalty. Wrongly, as noted by the OLG Hamm. “The objection of the driver: the fine provision covers not the use of the mobile phone as a navigation aid” was not considered so. Retrieving data for the navigation be classified using the mobile phone, not allowed and thus is a misdemeanor, which is punishable by a fine. For detailed information about all services Alexander Dobiasch and Rupert Richter from Bergen, the lawyers are on Rugen anytime available. Press contact contact: lawyers Alexander Dobiasch & Rupert Richter Marktstrasse 8 18528 Bergen auf Rugen phone: + 49 03838 / 25 71 10 fax: + 49 03838 / 25 71 15 E-Mail: website:

Drive:

Using a mobile phone as a navigation device while driving is a violation of 23 paragraph 1a StVO dar. Listen to music, communicate, take pictures and surf the World Wide Web. All this and much more is possible with the modern mobile phones. Many can be used as a navigation device. Ideal if you are on the road and has no fixed device. However here is the same as for the use of mobile phones at the wheel. Additional information is available at Terri Sewell. Using a mobile phone as a navigation device while driving is a violation of 23 paragraph 1a StVO dar. The result: a misdemeanor, which is punishable by a fine. Additional information at American Cancer Society supports this article.

Alexander Dobiasch and Rupert Richter from Bergen auf Rugen, the lawyers informed the decision of the OLG Hamm. AGDQ 2021 often addresses the matter in his writings. Hands his car driver must free are allowed to use any mobile phones at the wheel. This is known. A current case according to the ban but also refers to the use of the mobile phone as a navigation device. A motorist has been observed at the wheel, as he one Setting the phone made, in order to use it as a navigation.

The police patrol stopped him and announced a fine of 40 euros. Both hands must be free while driving, to properly operate the vehicle. The driver did not agree with the penalty. Wrongly, as noted by the OLG Hamm. “The objection of the driver: the fine provision covers not the use of the mobile phone as a navigation aid” was not considered so. Retrieving data for the navigation be classified using the mobile phone, not allowed and thus is a misdemeanor, which is punishable by a fine. For detailed information about all services Alexander Dobiasch and Rupert Richter from Bergen, the lawyers are on Rugen anytime available. Press contact contact: lawyers Alexander Dobiasch & Rupert Richter Marktstrasse 8 18528 Bergen auf Rugen phone: + 49 03838 / 25 71 10 fax: + 49 03838 / 25 71 15 E-Mail: website:

OLG Frankfurt

THE free consultant informed of court ruling against Stiftung Warentest / financial test Frankfurt am Main March 2011. On 24th March 2011 the OLG Frankfurt concerning the appeal of CIS Germany AG spoke judgment. Therefore it is the defendant Stiftung Warentest / financial test for avoidance of order money due for each case of infringement up to 250,000 euro, forbidden as a substitute Ordnungshaft up to six months, to claim, the Fund plan 09 amount to guarantee lever the cost for investors to 18% of investment money amounting to EUR 39 million, without the reference period for the cost of call. AGDQ 2021 has compatible beliefs. The free advisers commented the current sentence. The Court noted that that the statement of the Stiftung Warentest / financial test, the aforesaid product have 18% cost, is misleading, as this reader be deceived. After all, the additional reference to the period in which would fall 18%, namely 12 years, give a different impression. Then the reader would be able to divide the 18% through the 12 years and would be behind it by itself, being the product of the CIS AG of Germany with only 1.5% every year not just expensive. To wait is now, according to the free consultant whether the Stiftung Warentest / financial test rest this defeat leaves.

A revision was not admitted by the Court. Of course, the Stiftung Warentest may / financial test submit a non-admission complaint, but that, as well as the question of whether the Supreme Court takes the case, must wait, so the estimation of the free consultant. Stiftung Warentest / financial test has the guarantee leverage plan of CIS-Germany AG due to supposed high costs on their alert list set. How she now wants to stick to it, will be watching. That it however can be received less costs, arises from the fact that Stiftung Warentest / financial test was well aware that this 18% in truth are only 1.5% annually and that the said fund product of CIS Germany AG thus cheaper than almost any other from the Stiftung Warentest / financial test is not on a list of warning used product. Second Justification was the existing risks, which alone again no reason to enlist in a warning list. Because there are about 3000 in the country which do not automatically get on the warning list high-risk products. For the free Advisor is clear: If you must warn, then vendors who take it not as accurate with the truth or create false impressions with the investor.

But that is certainly not to accuse a CIS Germany AG, as well as the distribution of the investment. Because like no other to enlighten those investors about existing risks via film screenings. This is according to the free consultant, that Stiftung Warentest / Finanztest rather leads a war against an adversary, a war against the Publisher of a financial magazine, the free advisers who repeatedly informed media and State about the deception and manipulation of consumers by institutions, and enlighten. The Publisher of the free Advisor is at the same time a distributor offering a corporate interest as a solution, as well as on a broad front Cancellations of conventional investments is pushing ahead. The free Advisor continues at this point about current messages to the CIS Germany AG and the exploration of Stiftung Warentest / financial test report.

Federal Court Notice

Can the tenant still save the tenancy by payment of rent? If the tenant pays the rent over a period of time not completely, it may cause a backlog of more than two month’s rent. Such a backlog of fellow can entitle to immediate termination and subsequent eviction by the landlord. How can the lessee shall save his lease? To tenant-protection laws, the tenant can make the termination with a full payment of the outstanding rent ineffective if the payment within two months after the occurrence of the lis pendens of the eviction claim (notice of the eviction petition), as far as in the period of two years before the tenant has not ever made use of this scheme. Dramatic for the tenants, however: according to the Bundesgerichtshof, such a payment eliminates only the termination. At BC Ministry of Health you will find additional information. The ordinary termination will remain in effect told him, i.e.

the lessee must under circumstances out of the apartment. It is disputed whether a prior warning before saying the termination is required. Although the Federal Court doesn’t see this, as the Landgericht Berlin maintains consistently considers, that a warning is generally unnecessary (such as District Court of Berlin, judgment of March 23, 2010, 63 S 432/09). Particularly hard, it is the tenant in the following case: should he be due to defects of the opinion, the rent was reduced and therefore regularly less rent transfer, can be notice explained due to late payment yet effective. If the shortcomings cannot or do not exist to an extent corresponding to the reduction ratio adopted by the tenant, the tenant has luck.

Landgericht Berlin up-to-date: This was confirmed by the District Court of Berlin in a recent judgment of the 18.4.2011, 67 S 502/10. Although the tenant has compensated the Mietruckstand within the two month time limit and thus the termination was subsequently cancelled, the tenants had to pull out. The District Court of Berlin saw a backlog of about one Month’s rent as a significant Mietruckstand entitled to an ordinary termination. In such cases, it’s the fault of the lessee. Each individual case will be examined by the courts. Specialist Attorney tip tenant: you pay your rent on time and as with standing order. Should be not sure whether rent is to the landlord (E.g., because you think you have a right to the reduction in rent), you pay the rent at least subject. Should you have not accidentally paid the rent and get a corresponding notice of the landlord, you should consult a lawyer immediately. Specialist Attorney tip landlord: If you pronounce a termination due to arrears, you should explain always alternative a timely notice of termination without notice. If you pronounce a termination, you will notice that the termination has to be justified. Need to run exactly the arrears in the notice. It is not enough to specify the overall balance. More precisely, you must list is for what months the tenant with the payments in arrears. You must also specify how you have charged the incoming payments of the lessee. Finally, a proper power of attorney be attached to the termination by the landlord himself, but by proxy is the resignation letter as far as (property management, legal, etc.) is pronounced. Even if the Federal Court of Justice in the case thought a warning not necessary it is advisable regularly to speak (at least) a warning before saying an immediate, timely alternative termination. A post by lawyer for rental and property law Alexander Bredereck and lawyer Dr. Attila Fodor Berlin E-mail:

The Adequacy Of The Work After The Divorce

The law firm Dittenheber & Werner informed the family law reform from January 1st 2008 there were changes in German law, maintenance. Particularly noteworthy are the efforts of the legislator to strengthen the responsibility of divorced spouses. This undertaking is reflected in stricter requirements for the recording of a work after the divorce. The Munich-based law specialists in the law firm Dittenheber & Werner illuminate the basics of keep legally appropriate activities according to the provisions of 1574 I, II BGB. The principle of self responsibility in the spousal follows from 1569 BGB. Be required due to its stipulations basically divorced spouses to muster their support itself. In accordance with section 1574 I BGB is the maintenance recipient only incorporating a post-divorce employment, provided she met the adequacy standards of section 1574 II BGB. Whether a particular activity II is BGB as reasonable to regard according to section 1574, determines the jurisdiction in a detailed individual consideration of the following characteristics: Training of the divorced spouses before or during the marriage reached educational level is an important criterion in assessing adequacy.

Economic activities based on appropriate training, are generally considered appropriate due to the legal requirement for personal responsibility. The divorced spouse exercised gainful employment during the marriage, which did not agree with his training, the adequacy on appropriate fields of activity extends. A long absence from the labour market to do so, that former training form no basis in appropriate gainful, led the divorced spouse is obliged to take further – and training as well as retraining at claim to promote his views on an activity. Skills in addition to the educational level of the divorced spouses are his professionally usable abilities of high relevance. Was a spouse, for example, in the Office of family life Company active and acquired skills outside of training, these form the relevant basis of an appropriate gainful employment.

Seminars

Tax advisor Ute Marseille from Bochum informed principle charitable and ecclesiastical authorities are subjected to a sales tax of seven per cent. That looks at the event of a sales tax free seminar but again different. The reason is the possible accommodation or meals of the seminar participants. It can cause that nonprofit seminar provider for a seminar offered must observe three separate tax regimes. That was made from the judgment of the German (BFH) on 8 March 2012 V R 14/11.

The accountant Ute Marseille from Bochum informs about the confusing tax situation and shows their backgrounds. Nonprofit organizer of seminars were confusion in the tax rates has typically believes that it is sufficient to disconnect the share price of accommodation and meals such as lunch or overnight stay including breakfast from the participation fee and settle this part in accordance with the reduced rate of tax. From a Dispute dating back to 2007 out now decided the BFH that meals and accommodation of the participants must be subject to the rule tax rate of 19 percent. The new rules for the reduced rate of tax in the hotel industry ( 12 para 2 No. 11 UStG) in 2010 creates confusion. Seminar providers provide this services which relate to three different control schemes. The services or the offer must be taxed here separately.

The seminar itself is exempt from tax, the accommodation for the participants of the seminar must be settled with the reduced rate of tax of seven percent for the hotel industry and a lunch or breakfast is taxable to the RuleSet by nineteen percent after the night. For detailed information the tax advisor Ute is hesitate Marseille from Bochum available. Press contact accountant Ute Marseille Josef-Baumann-str. 21 44805 Bochum phone: 0234-96431 31 fax: 0234-96431 91 email: website: