The Athens Court of First Instance not only prohibited the commercial use of an apartment in a multi-unit residential building as a short-term rental (Airbnb), but also warned the owner that if the apartment is not used exclusively as a residence from now on, she will be subject to a financial penalty of €1,000 for every violation of the restrictions imposed by the court’s decision.

The ruling is expected to serve as case law for similar disputes, as the court held that “apartment units used for short-term rentals are not, in reality, private residences, but are effectively converted into tourist accommodations.”

The manager of an apartment building in Athens, who is also an apartment owner in the building, filed a lawsuit claiming that, in violation of the building’s regulations and the deed establishing the condominium ownership, another apartment owner had listed her apartment last summer on online platforms (such as Airbnb, Booking.com, etc.) as a tourist accommodation available for short-term rental.

The building manager further argued that Airbnb guests “cause disturbances on a daily basis both while staying in the apartment and in the common areas, including during designated quiet hours. They also engage in activities resulting in excessive use of the common areas and unusual wear and tear. At the same time, issues arise regarding the security of the building due to the unrestricted entry of third parties, disrupting the peaceful enjoyment of the privately owned residences by the other occupants.”

Among other things, the building manager asked the court to order the apartment owner to:

a) remove the short-term rental advertisement from all online tourist accommodation platforms;

b) remove the lockbox installed outside the apartment building that is used to store the keys to the building’s main entrance;

c) cease renting out the apartment under the Airbnb model in the future and use it solely as a residence.

She also requested that the court’s decision include the threat of monetary penalties and personal detention for any future violation of the court’s orders.

The Building Regulations

As the judges noted, the building regulations provide that the apartments “are intended to serve as residences, and any use other than residential use is prohibited.” This provision has never been amended.

According to the court, the intention of the owners, as reflected in the building regulations, was “to prohibit the use of apartments as hotels, hotel-type establishments, or for the provision of services that generate large numbers of visitors or unusual noise.” This intention also extends to prohibiting Airbnb rentals because “units used for short-term rentals are not, in reality, private residences but are effectively transformed into tourist accommodations.” In support of this conclusion, the Court of First Instance cited a prior decision of the Athens Court of Appeal involving a similar case.

The judges also clarified that the regulations “do not expressly prohibit the use of condominium units for short-term rentals, because such rentals could not have been foreseen when the regulations were originally drafted.”

However, “this gap must be filled by applying the principles of good faith and accepted standards of commercial conduct, interpreting the presumed intention of the contracting parties as if they had known of the possibility of such use of the condominium units at the time the regulations were drawn up.”

According to the ruling, “such accommodations, in which tourists stay temporarily during short vacations, unquestionably constitute hotel-type tourist accommodations. A characteristic supporting this classification is the fact that the tenants, before or during their stay, are not informed of the building regulations, which set out in detail the rights and obligations governing the relationships between co-owners and residents. By contrast, residential lease agreements ordinarily contain a specific contractual clause addressing compliance with the building regulations.”

Furthermore, “the visitors, who are usually foreign nationals using the apartment for only a few days (typically three to five days each) for vacation purposes, are likely to create noise both inside the apartment and in the common areas of the building, during both their arrival and departure while transporting their belongings, as well as while adapting the accommodation to their changing needs (such as moving furniture or using the facilities), and also while using the shared garden,” the court stated.

Tourist Accommodation

All of these factors have disturbed the peace and daily tranquility of the co-owners and interfered with the proper functioning of the apartment building. Based on the evidence presented, the court found it probable that the respondent was using her property for a purpose other than residential use—specifically, as tourist accommodation resembling a hotel, by hosting an unknown number of guests who rotated at regular intervals of only a few days, in violation of the building regulations.

Ultimately, the building manager’s application was held to be legally well-founded and was granted. The court ordered the apartment owner “to cease, on an interim basis, violating the building’s governing regulations, specifically by stopping and refraining in the future from the commercial use of her condominium unit through short-term rental arrangements.” The court also imposed the threat of a €1,000 monetary penalty for each violation of the operative provisions of the judgment.