An apartment is to be made available to another person free of rent. Perhaps only a transitional period is planned, perhaps the duration is not yet fixed. Before this becomes a long unresolved use, it is worth discussing the actual agreement in detail. “Free of charge” is an important statement, but it does not automatically answer all questions about the type of contract and the return.
Leihe denotes a specific contract structure
§ 598 BGB describes Leihe (loan for use) as the obligation to permit the use of an item free of charge. [LEIHE] Whether an actual handing over of an apartment falls under this should be assessed on the basis of the complete agreement. An originally remunerated contract does not automatically become a Leihe simply because of a subsequently chosen heading or individual omitted payments.
Write down what is to be made available for use and which services or payments are actually envisaged. An apparently simple agreement may contain further components that are relevant for its classification. This article does not decide a distinction from rent, favour or other arrangements.
Clearly determine time and purpose
§ 604 distinguishes on return between a determined loan period, a use derived from the purpose, and a duration that is neither determined nor apparent from the purpose. In the latter case the item can be demanded back at any time. [RUECKGABE] That is one reason not to leave a shared expectation at the vague phrase “until you find something else”.
A description of purpose and a meeting to talk are different things. A regular conversation can improve organisation, but does not readily determine the legal duration. If necessary, have the desired agreement drafted by an expert, rather than turning a private list of keywords into a reliably suitable contract template.
A later change is not always merely an organisational matter
§ 605 names special grounds for termination, including an unforeseen personal need and certain contract-breaching use. [KUENDIGUNG] The concrete case of application must be legally examined. Neither the person using the apartment nor the person making it available should derive an unexamined immediate right to eviction from general internet formulations.
For everyday life, a clear allocation of fixtures, channels of contact and actual responsibilities is also sensible. Who is informed in the event of a technical problem, which items belong to the handover and how are alterations discussed? These editorial organisational questions do not establish legal maintenance or cost obligations.
Same words can hide different expectations
In the fictional example an owner lets a friend live in an apartment free of charge. Both speak of a transitional solution. The owner thinks of a few months, the friend of use until a suitable own purchase opportunity.
In a joint conversation these expectations become visible. The actual agreement and its legal classification are clarified before either party treats their personal timetable as self-evidently binding. Afterwards practical use and subsequent return are organised in a comprehensible way.
This text concerns the possible contractual free-of-charge handover of an apartment in Germany. It does not authorise an individual claim for return or a termination declaration. Reporting obligations, taxes, insurances and claims of other parties remain additional questions. Good personal intentions and a comprehensible contractual basis should complement each other, rather than replace one another.