Facts
In this case, the question was whether separately rented parking spaces and garages fall under the protection of the right of extension for business premises pursuant to Art. 267a et seq. CO. The plaintiffs argued that they were dependent on a car for their professional or business activities and therefore the parking spaces should be considered business premises.
However, the Federal Supreme Court rejected this argument. It stated that a separately rented parking space in an underground garage cannot be considered a business premise within the meaning of Art. 267a CO. This view is also supported by the prevailing legal doctrine. Only one author, R. Jeanprêtre, may hold a different opinion, but he does not express it clearly.
A judgment of the Cantonal Court of Vaud, which the plaintiffs referred to, could not help them either, as the rented objects were used together for the operation of a riding school. Such connections, which could justify an extension of the right of…