Two people are listed on the tenants' side. Because of the same alleged arrears, court proceedings are being conducted against both. One person already has a rent judgment against them, while the other continues to dispute the claim. The file must now not only contain the note “Mietschuld gerichtlich bestätigt”. It must show who was actually decided against and what was decided.
First correctly classify a joint obligation
§ 891 ABGB describes liability for the whole where there is a corresponding obligation to an undivided hand. [SOLIDAR] For this contribution it is assumed that the contracting parties and the nature of their joint rent debt have been professionally clarified. Mere cohabitation is not a sufficient case description for that purpose.
Our editorial recommendation: Submit the contract, the monthly items asserted and the actual payments together. Note beside them every judicial decision with the parties and claims specified therein. A single connected factual situation can have differing procedural statuses for individual persons.
A judgment does not automatically take away the other person's defences
The OGH explains in 1 Ob 96/25m that co-tenants in a rent action do not form a necessary united party to the dispute. A judgment in favour against one joint debtor does not operate against the others and does not cut off their defences to the claim. [URTEIL]
Therefore do not use the existing judgment as an alleged substitute for any further required examination of the other person. Give the legal handling for that person the full status: which decision already exists, what did it relate to and which defences remain open in the other proceeding? An alleged arrear remains comprehensible with its individual items.
Do not transfer the payment procedural status to the eviction
The decision explicitly distinguishes rent payment from the termination or eviction dispute about the jointly based tenancy. There co-tenants can generally form a united party to the dispute. [URTEIL] A payment judgment is therefore not, merely because of its heading, a decision on the return of the flat by all persons involved.
Have it clarified on the basis of the actual decisions which person is already bound for which claim and which further step is possible or necessary. This article does not provide an enforcement order nor a deadline for legal remedies nor a recommendation to conduct an ongoing proceeding oneself.
Two decisions do not create double monthly rent
The OGH also makes clear that separate condemnations of joint debtors do not make the content of the debt into a performance to be rendered multiple times. [URTEIL] For practical clarity, therefore, the joint claim and individual decisions remain linked.
In the fictitious example the disputed amount is 1.200 Euro. One person already has a judgment against them; later the guardianship obtains a payment of 400 Euro on exactly this jointly pursued item. Purely arithmetically 800 Euro thus remain outstanding. A second judgment line may not from this one example item create either 2.400 Euro or two mutually independent residual claims. Costs, interest and other items are not included in this simplified example.
Update the actual payment status for all responsible handlers. In this way existing decisions are used to their proper extent without overlooking open defences or allowing the same rent amount to appear multiple times through separate files.