Lack of driving pleasure is no damage
11/28/2022
Is it reasonable to switch to your estate car if you actually want to use a Porsche convertible but can't because it has been illegally parked for days? The German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) had to deal with this question in the context of a claim for damages due to the temporary withdrawal of the possibility of use. This was based on the following case: The plaintiff is the owner of a BMW 3 Series station wagon (note: the BGH probably means "Touring") and a Porsche Turbo S Cabriolet, which she had parked in a garage. However, their exit was blocked by a vehicle, so that the lady was unable to use her Porsche for 14 days. She claimed that she had wanted to take a four-day vacation on Lake Garda in this very car. She stated that she would not have had an equivalent vehicle at her disposal with her BMW station wagon, which is why she was entitled to compensation for loss of use totaling EUR 2450.
The highest German civil court did not follow this view in its ruling of October 11, 2022 - file number VI ZR 35/22 - and consequently rejected the claim for damages due to temporary deprivation of use. The Porsche driver had not suffered any material damage, even if her property rights had been unlawfully and culpably violated by blocking the garage exit. The damage fails because the BMW was at her disposal. It was also reasonable for her to use it.
According to the BGH, however, it is irrelevant whether the Porsche is more prestigious than the estate car, conveys a different driving experience or increases individual enjoyment. This is only an individual reduction in enjoyment and does not constitute economic damage.
From a legal point of view, this is logical, even if a classic car enthusiast may see it differently. It should be noted that this only concerns aspects of private law and not the question of whether the blocker has committed a criminal offense. A clear distinction must also be made between financial loss and non-material damage, which under German law can only be compensated in exceptional cases. But at least the judgment mentions the term "enjoyment", which is probably synonymous with the "joy of driving"...
