Dispute over access: Judges say no to the return of asphalt in Trier!

Dispute over access: Judges say no to the return of asphalt in Trier!

In a case decided by the 9th Chamber of the Trier Administrative Court, a property owner's lawsuit against the city of Trier, which had made structural changes to the access to her property, was dismissed. Loud Lokalo.de The plaintiff's parents live in Trier-Nord on the property in question. In 2023, the city removed the asphalt access road and replaced it with a water-bound, sand-based surface course. The plaintiff complained about the new access road because it would create puddles when it rained, which would dirty her vehicles.

The city of Trier argued that the original asphalt access road was no longer safe for traffic and that the new design was chosen to take into account the tree roots underground. The decision to change the floor covering is based on the goal of unsealing areas and providing more living space for trees and green spaces. In February 2025, the plaintiff filed another lawsuit demanding the restoration of the original access route or an equivalent alternative.

Legal situation and effects

In their ruling, the judges emphasized that the scope of residents' use only includes the appropriate use of the property. According to the court, the plaintiff is not entitled to optimal access or a specific floor covering. Access to the street was unhindered, which further solidified the verdict. This view is in line with the general principles of real estate law, which regulates the rights to land, houses and condominiums, such as law-and-rat.info explained in detail.

With regard to the legal framework, the jurisdiction referred to the Civil Code (BGB), whereby the strongest real right is property ownership itself (§ 903 BGB). Changes to common property, as in this case, must be made with respect to the rights of all owners.

Legal remedies and next steps

The judgment can be appealed to the Rhineland-Palatinate Higher Administrative Court within one month. This gives the plaintiff the opportunity to pursue the case further and possibly obtain a decision that is more favorable to her. In our legal system, property owners have the opportunity to defend their rights through targeted lawsuits, but they must also consider the specific conditions and shared responsibility for changes in property ownership.

It remains to be seen whether the plaintiff will choose this route and what further legal steps she might take. This case exemplifies how important it is to properly weigh up individual needs and the requirements of environmental protection.