Anyone who wants to let a flat only for a limited time, because they intend to use it themselves later, quickly thinks of a fixed-term tenancy (Zeitmietvertrag). In residential tenancy law, however, a valid term limit is only possible under strict conditions: it requires a statutory ground under § 575 BGB, and this ground – for instance future owner's own use (Eigenbedarf) – must be communicated to the tenant in writing already when the contract is concluded. If the ground or the written statement is missing, the contract is deemed to have been concluded for an indefinite period. This guide explains the qualified fixed-term tenancy for own use objectively: which grounds are permissible, what rights the tenant has, what happens if the ground is delayed or ceases to apply, and how the fixed-term tenancy differs from a notice for own use (Eigenbedarfskündigung) under an open-ended contract.
What is a qualified fixed-term tenancy (Zeitmietvertrag) under § 575 BGB?
Since the tenancy law reform of 2001, a residential tenancy can no longer be freely limited in time. § 575 BGB conclusively governs when a term limit is valid: a tenancy may only be entered into for a fixed period if, after the tenancy ends, the landlord needs the premises for one of the grounds named by law and informs the tenant of this ground in writing when the contract is concluded. This is therefore referred to as a qualified fixed-term tenancy (Zeitmietvertrag).
The difference from the general tenancy agreement is fundamental: the standard case in residential tenancy law is the open-ended contract, which ends by notice of termination. The fixed-term contract, by contrast, ends without notice when the agreed period expires – but only if the strict requirements of § 575 BGB are met from the outset. A term limit imposed merely because it currently suits the landlord, or because the landlord does not want to be tied down, is not possible in residential tenancy law. Mere expediency is not enough; one of the three statutory grounds must exist.
The three permissible grounds for a term limit – own use, conversion, service flat
§ 575 (1) BGB names three – and only three – permissible grounds for a term limit:
- Future owner's own use (Eigenbedarf) (No. 1): after the tenancy ends, the landlord wants to use the premises as a home for themselves, their family members or members of their household. This is the most common case – for instance when the child is to move in after their studies, or the flat is to be occupied later by the landlord.
- Demolition or substantial conversion (No. 2): the landlord wants to lawfully remove the premises or to alter or repair them so substantially that the measures would be considerably hindered by a continuation of the tenancy.
- Letting to a person under a service obligation (No. 3): after expiry, the landlord wants to let the premises to a person obliged to perform a service, such as a caretaker's or company flat.
It is important that, when the contract is concluded, the ground for the term limit is genuinely intended and plausible. A merely pretextual intention does not support the term limit. The law does not allow grounds for residential premises other than these three – nor any combination with freely invented additional grounds.
Written form and notice at contract conclusion – otherwise the contract counts as open-ended
The formal hurdle of § 575 BGB is strict and is in practice underestimated most often. The landlord must inform the tenant of the specific ground for the term limit in writing when the contract is concluded. As a rule, this happens directly in the tenancy agreement. It is not enough merely to agree a term; the ground must be named specifically, for example: “Term limit, because the landlord wants to use the flat for their daughter after expiry.”
The legal consequence of a breach is clear and unpleasant for landlords: if no permissible ground is named, or the ground is not communicated in writing or not at contract conclusion, then the tenancy is deemed to have been concluded for an indefinite period (§ 575 (1) sentence 2 BGB). The contract then continues like an ordinary open-ended tenancy and ends only by ordinary notice of termination with a legitimate interest. Nor does subsequently supplying the ground after contract conclusion cure the defect. A formulation that is too sweeping or unclear can likewise render the term limit invalid.
The tenant's right to information about the continued existence of the ground (§ 575 (2) BGB)
The tenant is protected throughout the entire term. § 575 (2) BGB grants the tenant a right to information: no earlier than four months before the term limit expires, the tenant may require the landlord to inform them within one month whether the ground for the term limit still exists.
This allows the tenant to check whether the contract will actually end at the agreed time or whether the situation has changed. If the landlord provides the information late, the tenant may demand an extension of the tenancy by the period of the delay. So if the notice is delayed by, for example, two months, the tenant may claim an extension of two months. For landlords this means: a tenant's request for information should be answered on time and in a verifiable manner, so as not to trigger an unwanted extension.
When the ground is delayed or ceases to apply (§ 575 (3) BGB)
Plans change – and § 575 (3) BGB governs precisely that. This is where the greatest risk lies for landlords who set a term limit too early or too optimistically:
- Later occurrence of the ground: if the ground for the term limit occurs later than planned – for instance because the conversion is postponed or the own use (Eigenbedarf) only arises months later – the tenant may demand an extension of the tenancy by a corresponding period.
- Cessation of the ground: if the ground ceases to apply definitively – for instance because the planned own use no longer exists or the conversion does not take place – the tenant may demand an extension for an indefinite period. The fixed-term contract thereby effectively becomes an open-ended one.
Decisive is the burden of proof: it lies with the landlord regarding the occurrence of the ground for the term limit and the duration of the delay (§ 575 (3) sentence 3 BGB). The landlord must therefore be able to prove that the ground actually exists and was not merely pretextual. Moreover, under § 575 (4) BGB any agreement deviating to the tenant's disadvantage is invalid – these protective rights cannot be contracted away.
Distinction: fixed-term tenancy (§ 575) versus notice for own use (§ 573)
Owner's own use (Eigenbedarf) can lead to the end of a tenancy by two very different routes – the two should not be confused:
- Qualified fixed-term tenancy (Zeitmietvertrag) (§ 575 BGB): the own use is already established as a plan when the contract is concluded and is agreed in writing. The contract ends without notice when the period expires. The prerequisite is the correct written naming of the ground from the outset.
- Notice for own use (Eigenbedarfskündigung) under an open-ended contract (§ 573 (2) No. 2 BGB): the own use arises only during an open-ended tenancy. The landlord then needs a legitimate interest and must give notice with reasons. The statutory notice periods under § 573c BGB apply – three months up to five years' tenancy, six months over five years, nine months over eight years – and the tenant may object to the notice on hardship grounds under § 574 BGB.
Put simply: with the fixed-term tenancy, the own use is in the contract from the start and the contract runs out by itself; with notice for own use, the need arises later and only leads to termination via a reasoned notice. Anyone who knows from the outset that they will need the flat themselves at a foreseeable point is often better advised to take the route via § 575 BGB – provided they comply precisely with the formal requirements.
Typical mistakes by landlords and what to watch out for
In practice, term limits usually fail not for lack of a ground, but in the implementation. Common mistakes:
- Term limit without a statutory ground: a mere agreement on a period “because it currently suits” is invalid – the contract then counts as open-ended.
- Ground not named, or named too late: if the ground for the term limit is not communicated in writing and not at contract conclusion, the term limit lapses.
- Formulation too vague: a mere reference to “own use” without specifying for whom and for what can be insufficient.
- Information deadline missed: if the tenant's request under § 575 (2) BGB is answered late, an extension by the period of delay looms.
- Ground is delayed or ceases to apply: anyone setting a term limit too early risks an extension under § 575 (3) BGB – and, if the ground ceases, even for an indefinite period.
It is advisable to document the ground precisely and plausibly in the contract, to set a realistic term and to answer requests for information on time and in a verifiable manner. Since the validity of the entire contract is at stake here, the specific drafting of the contract belongs in the hands of expert legal advice. This guide provides general information and does not replace legal advice.
