Facts
The dispute opposes Z. (the plaintiff) to U.G. and B.G. (the defendants), who were tenants of an apartment initially belonging to A., then acquired by Z. in 1997. Disputes arose concerning the use of the basement, attic and garden, as well as the dismantling by Z. of the defendants' satellite dish. In July 1997, Z. initiated conciliation proceedings to enforce the provisions of the lease contract and the building regulations. In the absence of an agreement, Z. requested the President of the District Court of Zurzach to rule on the rights and obligations of the defendants. The latter had previously deposited the rent for October and initiated new conciliation proceedings. Z. considered this deposit as unjustified and terminated the lease for late payment as of December 31, 1997. The defendants contested this termination with the conciliation authority.Considerations
The Federal Tribunal considers that the deposit of the rent by the defendants was justified, as they could in good faith consider that there were defects in the dwelling that they neither had to repair nor to bear. Consequently, the rents are deemed to have been paid and the extraordinary termination for late payment is not valid.
Indeed, it appears from the contested judgment that the initial lessor had granted the defendants usage rights over the basement, attic and garden, which were not regulated by the written lease contract. Insofar as these usage rights were denied or withdrawn from them, the defendants could in good faith consider that this constituted a defect in the leased property.
Similarly, with regard to the dismantling of the satellite dish, the Federal Tribunal…