Skip to content

Neighbor's Demolition Bid Fails: Federal Court Upholds Terrace and Retaining Wall

A neighbor's persistent attempts to demolish a homeowner's terrace and retaining wall have been largely unsuccessful, with the Federal Administrative Court the latest to uphold the construction's legality.

It is the picture of a terrace of some architecture and in the background there are many buildings.
It is the picture of a terrace of some architecture and in the background there are many buildings.

Neighbor's Demolition Bid Fails: Federal Court Upholds Terrace and Retaining Wall

A homeowner's dispute with a nextdoor neighbor over a terrace and retaining wall has reached the Federal Administrative Court. The neighbor initially sought demolition, but the building authority and various courts have upheld the construction's legality.

The saga began when the homeowner constructed a large terrace with a retaining wall, encroaching slightly onto the neighbor's property. The neighbor promptly requested its demolition, citing building code violations. However, the building authority rejected the application, asserting that the structure did not violate any neighbor-protecting regulations.

The terrace and retaining wall did exceed the rear building limit, but the homeowner had been granted an exemption for constructing a massive boundary wall on their property. Thus, the obligation to show consideration was not violated, and the neighbor had no claim to intervention by the building authority. The administrative court dismissed the neighbor's appeal, upholding the building authority's decision.

Undeterred, the neighbor appealed again. This time, the administrative court of appeal allowed the appeal but found no serious doubts about the judgment's correctness. The case then reached the Federal Administrative Court, which approved the defendant's legal remedy against the administrative court's judgment.

The homeowner's terrace with a retaining wall and swimming pool remains standing, deemed not subject to distance area requirements as a special case. The neighbor's persistent appeals have been largely unsuccessful, with courts consistently upholding the construction's legality.

Read also:

Latest