When the client occupies the building and shows no contrary behavior after a reasonable examination period, this can be seen as tacit acceptance. For a single-family home, an examination period of about 6 months is considered appropriate.
Background: The architect is liable for breaches of contractual or other obligations. Claims against the architect are subject to the statute of limitations. The provisions for duration, commencement, and interruptions of the statute of limitations were different until 31.12.2001 than under the newer law.
Example: (according to OLG Celle, judgment of 02.08.2023 – 14 U 200/19) An architect is commissioned to renovate and modernize a single-family house. Subsequently, there are disagreements between the two parties, leading the architect to demand the remaining honorarium from the builder. The builder argues that the claim already fails due to the missing maturity of the honorarium according to § 15 I HOAI 2013: He did not accept the architectural work, and this acceptance is a prerequisite for maturity under § 15 HOAI 2013. He further emphasizes that the acceptance of construction services should not be confused with that of architectural services.
Both the regional court and the higher regional court take a different view and see the maturity of the honorarium claim as given. They assume a tacit acceptance of the architectural work that took place during the occupation of the building. Generally, a tacit willingness to accept can only be inferred if the client had sufficient opportunity to inspect the work. The duration of this inspection and evaluation period depends on the individual case and is determined by general expectations. Taking into account the legitimate interests of the architect, it would be unjustified to indefinitely extend the inspection period.
Note: In light of the above jurisprudence, one might assume that a correspondingly extended inspection period might be required for larger construction projects than single-family homes. However, it must always be checked whether the maturity of the honorarium has not already occurred due to a substitute for acceptance (e.g., onset of the settlement relationship).