[ad_1]
Soldiers room
The “Eichwäldli family” initiated another attempt and announced a legal dispute against the city of Lucerne.
A police eviction of the property on Murmattweg is not legally possible, residents claim. They refer to a 2012 federal court ruling. The city opposes and sticks to their approach.
The ultimatum expires. Tomorrow Thursday at 8am, residents of the property on Murmattweg near Eichwäldli should vacate this building:
The property at Murmattweg 2.
Otherwise, the owner, the city of Lucerne, wants to file a criminal complaint, as it announced on Monday. This would later be verified by the prosecutor’s office and could result in the police evacuating the building after a few days, at least that was the case with the previous squatters in the city of Lucerne, for example, that of the “Gundula” group in Obergrundstrasse. .
But the situation in the so-called soldiers’ hall on Murmattweg is different, say residents, who call themselves the “Eichwäldli family.” Because unlike the previous squatters, they would have had a business loan agreement with the owner. In such cases, eviction by the police by trespassing is excluded, according to Wednesday’s message.
First a court has to decide
The Eichwäldli family refers to a 2012 federal court ruling (1B_510 / 2012). At the time it was a restaurant operator in Zurich who did not want to leave the restaurant despite the owner’s warning. The latter filed a criminal complaint that was rejected. In the judgment he says:
“The failure of a tenant to voluntarily surrender the rented property after the lease expires is also one of the landlord’s normal business risks; Such disputes are of a civil law nature and therefore must be previously resolved by civil law means.
From this, the Eichwäldli family concludes: Before the building can be evacuated, legal procedures are necessary. In this procedure, it would be necessary to check whether the contractual relationship with the city has actually ended.
The Eichwäldli family also wrote that they had “incurred extraordinary expenses” on the property, so that “there is no utility loan, but rent.” This means maintenance measures in the building, such as heating. That is why it should “benefit from greater protection against dismissal.” They challenged the termination by the city on February 15 before the rent and lease arbitration board and requested the extension. It is still assumed that “an alternative to the planned demolition can and should be found”. And it will irritate you that the city council is “apparently misinformed.”
Is the criminal complaint no longer valid? The facts are probably not that simple. The fact that the building is in a questionable state in terms of safety should also influence the whole. According to the city, the rental agreement expired at the end of September 2020, only the withdrawal period was first extended until the end of January and then postponed until February 15 due to parliamentary debate.
In any case, the city sees no reason to change anything. She still hopes that the Eichwäldli family will uphold the ultimatum, as construction director Manuela Jost (GLP) writes in a short statement. “Otherwise, the city will file a criminal complaint as announced.”
The tenants association does not presume judgment
The Lucerne tenants association cannot seriously assess the situation without more information and documents such as contracts, as CEO Cyrill Studer Korevaar writes upon request. Basically, the question arises whether the Eichwäldli family are legally considered as tenants. If this is the case, after receiving a notice of termination, you can challenge it within 30 days before the arbitration authority and request an extension. So, “the formal correctness must first be evaluated by the arbitration authority and then the result of the arbitration negotiation must be awaited,” says Studer. However, if the Eichwäldli family does not have a valid rental agreement and is legally considered the occupant, “it is an illegal entry and the owners can request the evacuation of the police.”
The Eichwäldli family is fighting on several fronts against the planned demolition of the soldiers’ room. Residents also doubt that the building can only be repaired at disproportionately high costs. They were also able to convince architects who speak out against demolition for reasons of urban planning and building history.
