Smoke detector in court: Small beeper with great potential for excitement - Politics - Stuttgarter Nachrichten

Karlsruhe - It is one of the principles of German civil law that the wheels of the judiciary also begin to grind at the request of those involved when very small amounts are involved. This Friday, the 5th civil senate of the Federal Court of Justice will meet to announce a judgment whose financial impact is manageable. Five federal judges had previously negotiated the matter, before them a district judge in Mettmann and the district court in Düsseldorf bent over the files. It's about smoke detectors, which are now available in a hardware store for less than ten euros - and it's about something very fundamental.

The disputants are members of a homeowners association (WEG). At their owners' meeting, they decided to outsource the installation and maintenance of smoke alarm devices for all apartments to an external company. The plaintiffs had - exemplary - equipped their apartment with the appropriate technology before this decision. They don't want to be asked to pay again and explain that the devices won't get any better if the community of owners acts together - and that joint maintenance shouldn't have been decided at all.

Obligations change between owner and tenant

The courts in Mettmann and Düsseldorf saw things differently. The uniform installation and maintenance by a specialist company ensures that the installation is carried out properly and that regular maintenance is not forgotten. A regulation "from a single source" is understandable, especially against the background of "insurance liability risks". The judges refer to the state building regulations of North Rhine-Westphalia, which are comparable to the regulations in Baden-Württemberg in these points. The obligation to install smoke detectors also lies with the owner in this country; the obligation to check the same for the occupant of the apartment, regardless of whether this is the tenant or the owner.

In Baden-Württemberg, too, smoke detectors are repeatedly responsible for smoking heads in the courtrooms. At the end of November, the district court of Heidelberg decided that tenants must accept if the landlord wants to install wireless smoke alarms in their four walls. The residents of the three-room apartment in Heidelberg had explained that the smoke detectors caused considerable electrosmog and thus endangered their health. (Ref.: 5 S 40/17). According to the assessment of the district court, however, the obligation to tolerate the installation of wireless smoke alarms does not constitute “unreasonable hardship” for the tenants. The interest of the plaintiff (a housing association) to uniformly install such alarms in all of its 8,600 apartments prevails . This achieves a high level of protection for the living space as well as life and limb, which is more favorable for the tenants. The judgment is final.

The Federal Constitutional Court was also called upon

The smoke detector requirement, which applies in all 16 federal states and is regulated in the state building codes, has even dealt with the Federal Constitutional Court. The tenant of an apartment had refused to tolerate the installation of a radio-based smoke alarm. He feared that ultrasonic sensors and infrared technology could be used to profile the movement of people in his apartment. It was also possible to record conversations. The local and regional courts saw things differently, and the tenant filed a constitutional complaint. But Karlsruhe did not accept it.