RENODIARYRENOVATION MANAGER
DEEN Start for free
DE
Letting Yield & Cash Flow

Eviction Lawsuit Germany 2026: Costs, Duration, Process

Last updated: 30 October 2026 · Reading time approx. 9 minutes

The notice has gone out, the deadline has passed — and the tenant is still living in your flat. From here on, no letter will help; only an enforceable title will. What that route costs can be pinned down with surprising precision: the court, the lawyer and the bailiff all bill from statutory tables. Exactly one item escapes that precision — and it is the item you get to decide about.

The most expensive mistake comes first

The obvious shortcut — change the lock, clear the flat, put the belongings in storage — is by far the costliest route. Anyone who deprives a possessor of possession against their will acts unlawfully under § 858 (1) BGB; the statute calls this verbotene Eigenmacht, unlawful interference with possession. That the tenancy was validly terminated changes nothing: the tenant remains the possessor until they give possession up or it is taken from them — and only the bailiff may take it.

The consequence is harsh: § 231 BGB imposes liability in damages even where the mistake about the right of self-help was not negligent. Good faith is no defence here — what that means in practice is in the case-law section below.

Before any of this there must be a valid termination of the tenancy — where rent arrears are the reason, the whole lawsuit turns on termination for rent arrears and the grace-period payment, which can still defeat a lawsuit already on foot. The lawful route then runs through § 546 (1) BGB — the tenant must return the property — and, if they do not, through a judgment. Enforcement takes place under § 704 ZPO from final judgments that are final and binding or declared provisionally enforceable. Without that title, nothing happens.

The value in dispute drives everything — and it is smaller than you think

Every fee hangs off the value in dispute, and for an eviction the statute fixes it: under § 41 (2) GKG the decisive amount is the consideration payable for one year. Not the value of the flat, not the arrears — one year's rent. And specifically, under § 41 (1) sentence 2 GKG, the net base rent; service charges count only where they are agreed as a flat rate and not billed separately.

Take a flat at €900 net rent with separately billed service charges. The value in dispute is then 12 × €900 = €10,800. If you also sue for the accrued arrears, the values are aggregated under § 39 (1) GKG — the value in dispute rises, and the fees rise with it.

Payment up front, not on account. Under § 12 (1) GKG the claim form should not be served until the procedural fee has been paid. The bailiff, too, is entitled under § 4 (1) GvKostG to make execution of the mandate conditional on an advance. So you carry the entire amount — at a point when no rent has come in for months. That the costs ultimately fall on the debtor under § 788 (1) ZPO is a claim, not a cash receipt.

What the statutory items cost

These three positions are set out in tables and can be determined to the cent. The GKG and RVG fee tables were last revised in 2025; the values below are the current ones.

ItemBasisAt a value in dispute of €10,800
Court fee3.0 fee under item 1210 KV GKG, table value €313.50€940.50
Lawyer: procedural fee1.3 under item 3100 VV RVG, table value €707.00€919.10
Lawyer: hearing fee1.2 under item 3104 VV RVG€848.40
Lawyer: postage and telecoms allowanceItem 7002 VV RVG: 20% of the fees, capped at €20.00€20.00
VAT thereonItem 7008 VV RVG, rate 19% under § 12 (1) UStG€339.63
Bailiff (putting you into possession)Item 241 KV GvKostG€109.00
His disbursement allowanceItem 716 KV GvKostG: 20% of the fees, at least €3.00, at most €10.00€10.00
Total of the statutory items—€3,186.63

The lawyer's fees here are €1,787.50 net and €2,127.13 gross. That is one lawyer — yours. If you lose, the tenant's comes on top at a comparable level.

The item nobody can put a number on

Now the part that advice sites like to paper over with a range. In an eviction under § 885 ZPO the bailiff dispossesses the debtor and puts you into possession — and he removes the movable goods and, if nobody takes them, places them in storage at the debtor's expense (§ 885 (2) and (3) ZPO). Removal firm, transport, storage: these are third-party services at market prices, not fees. They depend on the size of the flat and the volume of the belongings, and they are the reason why no one can responsibly quote a total. You still have to advance them.

This is exactly where the alternative the statute has expressly provided since 2013 comes in.

The restricted eviction: § 885a ZPO

Under § 885a (1) ZPO the enforcement mandate may be restricted to the measures under § 885 (1) ZPO — that is, to dispossessing the debtor and putting you into possession. The bailiff then does not clear the flat. Under § 885a (2) ZPO he documents the readily visible movable goods in the record and may take photographs for that purpose. You handle the rest.

Eviction under § 885 ZPORestricted mandate, § 885a ZPO
Bailiff's fee€163.50 (item 240 KV GvKostG)€109.00 (item 241 KV GvKostG)
Removal and storageadvanced by you, amount opennone — you act yourself
Safekeeping of the belongingsbailiff or public storeyour duty, § 885a (3) ZPO
Your standard of liability—intent and gross negligence
Disposal permitted—after one month, § 885a (4) ZPO

If the on-site act takes more than three hours according to the record, item 500 KV GvKostG adds a time supplement of €24.00 for each further hour begun — one more reason not to have the bailiff clear the flat.

On the fees the difference comes to €54.50 — hardly worth mentioning. The difference lies entirely in the second item: you avoid the removal advance. In return you take on three duties. First, safekeeping: you may remove the goods but must keep them; only where there is obviously no interest in preservation may you destroy them, and for that you are answerable under § 885a (3) sentence 3 ZPO for intent and gross negligence. Second, the waiting period: you may only dispose of the goods once the debtor has failed to collect them within one month of your being put into possession (§ 885a (4) ZPO). Third, surrender: goods that are not attachable and goods with no expected realisation proceeds must, under § 885a (5) ZPO, be handed over on request at any time.

Do not confuse this with the landlord's lien over the tenant's goods brought onto the premises: that is a separate security right for your rent claim, whereas § 885a ZPO only governs what happens to the belongings during enforcement.

Your costs for removal and safekeeping count as costs of enforcement under § 885a (7) ZPO, so you can claim them from the debtor. Whether you receive them is another question; somebody who could not pay the rent usually does not pay the eviction costs either.

How long it takes

Figures between two months and two years circulate here. What is solid is the justice statistics: according to the Federal Statistical Office's Statistical Report Civil Courts 2024, the local courts in Germany disposed of 190,309 residential tenancy cases, with an average duration of 5.1 months. The 27,530 cases that ended in a contested judgment took 9.3 months on average.

The statistic covers residential tenancy cases as a whole, not evictions specifically. As a planning figure the direction is nonetheless unambiguous: a case in which the tenant defends runs towards three quarters of a year — and that is the time up to judgment. Enforcement only follows after that.

Two extensions come on top. The court may grant a reasonable period of grace for vacating under § 721 (1) ZPO, and it may do so on application or of its own motion — you cannot prevent it. The ceiling is in § 721 (5) ZPO: not more than one year in total, counted from the date the judgment becomes final. And the period may be extended under § 721 (3) ZPO as long as that one-year limit is not reached.

The figure that actually matters in the cash flow. At 9.3 months with no rent coming in, our example flat loses roughly €8,370 in rent — more than twice all the statutory procedural costs put together. The legal costs are not the problem with an eviction lawsuit. The time is.

Four points that decide months

1. Who has to be named in the title

The bailiff assesses on site who actually possesses the flat and enforces only against the persons the title is directed at. Where there are several tenants this is less strict than assumed — see the case-law section. The critical case is the third party who is not a tenant: a subtenant, a partner who has moved in. If you learn of their possession only after the close of the oral hearing, § 940a (2) ZPO permits an eviction injunction against them too, provided there is an enforceable title against the tenant. If you know beforehand, they belong in the claim.

2. The interim injunction is almost always closed to you

Residential premises may be evicted by interim injunction under § 940a (1) ZPO only on grounds of unlawful interference with possession or a concrete danger to life or limb. Rent arrears alone are not enough. There is exactly one additional route, and it runs through point 3.

3. The security order — at a price

If you combine the eviction claim with a payment claim arising from the same legal relationship, the court will, on your application under § 283a (1) ZPO, order the defendant to provide security for the sums falling due after the action became pending — provided the claim has a high prospect of success and the order is justified, on a balancing of interests, to avert particular detriment. If he does not provide it, eviction may also be ordered by interim injunction under § 940a (3) ZPO. That is the sharpest lever in a tenancy case built on arrears.

The price is in the note to item 1211 KV GKG: the reduction of the court fee to 1.0 falls away if a decision on an application for a security order has already been made. So you give up the chance of the reduction before you know whether you would have needed it.

4. Moving out mid-case saves a third

If the whole case ends by withdrawal of the claim, judgment by consent or waiver, a court-approved settlement or a declaration that the matter is settled, the 3.0 fee is reduced to 1.0 under item 1211 KV GKG. In our example that is €627.00 less in court fees. A tenant who moves out in the middle of the case is therefore commercially the best of all outcomes — even if it does not feel that way.

Tax treatment: deductible expenses, nothing special

Court fees, lawyer's fees and bailiff costs for a let property are expenses incurred to acquire, secure and maintain income, and therefore deductible expenses under § 9 (1) sentence 1 EStG. They belong in the Anlage V (the German rental-income schedule) for the year in which you paid them. Lost rent, by contrast, is not a deductible item: what was never received cannot be deducted — it is simply missing on the income side. If the flat stands empty for a while after the eviction, the usual rules apply for that period; which items continue to run and remain deductible is covered in our article on deducting costs for a vacant rental property.

What the courts have decided

Two decisions of the Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof, BGH) shape this process — one on what happens if you bypass the title, and one on whom the title has to name.

BGH, judgment of 14 July 2010 – VIII ZR 45/09

Where a landlord takes possession of a flat without a court title and clears it out, that is unlawful self-help for the consequences of which he is liable irrespective of fault under § 231 BGB. Decisive in practice is the second holding: the landlord is under a duty of care that includes drawing up a meaningful inventory of the goods taken into safekeeping and having their value estimated. If he does not, he must prove to what extent the stock and value differ from the tenant's statements, in so far as those are plausible. In practice: the tenant produces a list, and you have to disprove it. The senate expressly confirms its line from 1977 and 2003 — nothing is in flux here.

BGH, order of 30 April 2020 – I ZB 61/19

For an eviction under § 885 ZPO, a title obtained against one of several joint tenants is sufficient. The landlord is not obliged to obtain a title against every person named in the tenancy agreement: several tenants owe the return of the property as joint and several debtors under § 431 BGB, and a title against one joint and several debtor may generally be enforced in full. The limit is set by the actual state of possession — the bailiff has to assess it and to check whether the obligation to vacate under the title is directed at the possessor he has established. The senate decided the case of a single tenant in sole actual possession; where you know of non-tenants in co-possession, better to include them in the claim.

Frequently asked questions

Can I change the lock if the tenant has moved away to an unknown address?

No. Even then it remains unlawful interference with possession under § 858 (1) BGB, with the no-fault liability under § 231 BGB. The route runs through the eviction claim — by public service of process if necessary — and then through the bailiff.

Can I bring the eviction claim without a lawyer?

There is no compulsory representation before the local court, which has jurisdiction over residential tenancy matters — so the €2,127.13 gross from our example is avoidable. Against the saving stands the fact that a formally vulnerable notice or an incomplete claim extends the case by months, and months cost more here than fees.

What happens to the furniture if the tenant does not collect it?

In a restricted eviction you may dispose of it once one month has passed since you were put into possession (§ 885a (4) ZPO); no notice of auction is required, and goods that cannot be realised may be destroyed. Not before that — and goods that are not attachable must, under § 885a (5) ZPO, be handed over on request at any time.

Will I get the costs back from the tenant?

Legally, yes: the costs of enforcement fall on the debtor under § 788 (1) ZPO in so far as they were necessary, and your outlays under § 885a (3) and (4) ZPO also count as such costs by virtue of its paragraph 7. Commercially you should treat the amount as lost until it is in the bank.

Lost rent, legal costs and Anlage V in one place

RenoDiary brings rental income, invoices and receipts together per property — and shows what one empty month means for the cash flow and for the tax return.

Start for free

Sources

This article offers general orientation and does not replace individual tax or legal advice within the meaning of § 3 StBerG. The fee amounts are calculated from the statutory tables for the stated value in dispute; removal, storage and time supplements are added depending on the case. The outcome of a tenancy case is decided on its own facts.