LEXIKON

The Austrian Supreme Court (08.04.2020, 3 Ob 32/20g; www.ris.bka.gv.at) recently had to decide in a legal dispute between a son and his mother whether a rental agreement had been concluded between the two or whether a family law tenancy agreement still existed.

The son claimed that a rental agreement had been concluded, whereby instead of actual rent payments, work services had been agreed as remuneration for the transfer of use. Over the years, the son carried out various renovation works in the premises he occupied (without any legal obligation to do so) and also filled in some holes in the exterior facade of the house. Occasionally, he mowed the lawn and shoveled snow (in return for payment from his mother). The Supreme Court assumed that in the present case there was no agreement to pay rent and that there was in fact a family law tenancy that could be revoked at any time. Such a living arrangement is not only to be assumed when there is an obligation to provide accommodation to other family members; rather, there are numerous actual grants of use arising from the natural sense of belonging among family members which, according to the Supreme Court, are not regulated by law, are not legally enforceable against the will of the grantor, and are revocable at any time.