Dr. Andreas van den Eikel | White & Case LLP International Law Firm, Global Law Practice
Andreas van den Eikel
Andreas van den Eikel

Dr. Andreas van den Eikel

Local Partner, Berlin

T +49 30 880911 740

E [email protected]


Andreas van den Eikel primarily advises on real estate law. He specializes in real estate transactions, commercial tenancy law and property law.

He advises mainly national and international investors, asset managers and developers on the acquisition/sale, development and management of real estate focusing in particular on office and retail property, shopping centers and hotels.

Andreas van den Eikel provides clients with comprehensive support for their real estate transactions (portfolios and single properties, asset and share deals, including sale-and-leaseback) from the due diligence through to designing and negotiating contracts as well as post-closing matters. He advises on concluding tenancy contracts and any tenancy law issues.

Prior to joining White & Case in February 2012, he worked in the Real Estate Practice of another leading international law firm.

Bars and Courts

  • Rechtsanwalt


  • Dr jur, University of Würzburg
  • Diplom-Jurist, University of Würzburg
  • LLM, University of Würzburg
  • Second State Exam, Higher Regional Court of Bamberg
  • Certificate In-depth Studies of European Law, University of Würzburg
  • First State Exam, University of Würzburg
  • Certificate Additional Studies of European Law, University of Würzburg


  • German
  • English



  • Real estate purchase agreement can also be modified without a notary - a property purchase agreement may be modified informally if the conveyance has become binding. Commentary on the Federal Court of Justice judgment of 14 September 2018 – V ZR 213/17 (Grundstückskaufvertrag kann auch ohne Notar geändert werden- Änderungen eines Grundstückskaufvertrags sind formlos möglich, wenn die Auflassung bindend geworden ist). In: IZ Immobilien Zeitung, Issue 44, 2018, P. 12, 2018

  • Municipality is liable for incorrect preliminary building permit –if a preliminary building permit is incorrect a purchaser of the property has a claim for damages against the municipality even if the preliminary building permit is to be prolonged only after its expiry. Commentary on the Federal Court of Justice judgment of 2 February 2017 – VIII ZR 41/16 (Gemeinde haftet für falschen Bauvorbescheid - Einem Grundstückserwerber steht ein Schadensersatzanspruch gegen eine Gemeinde bei einem fehlerhaften Vorbescheid selbst dann zu, wenn er erst nach Ablauf der Geltungsdauer verlängert werden soll). In: IZ Immobilien Zeitung, Issue 22, 2017, P. 12, 2017

  • Wrong order may create failure of tenant’s preemption right - The question of whether a tenant has a right of preemption depends on the sequence in which the transfer of possession of the apartment, its conversion, the intention to convert it, and its sale occur. Commentary on the Federal Court of Justice judgment of 6 April 2016 – VIII ZR 143/15 (Falsche Reihenfolge lässt Vorkaufsrecht des Mieters scheitern - Für das Entstehen eines Vorkaufsrechts für den Mieter ist die zeitliche Abfolge von Überlassung der Wohnung, Umwandlung oder Umwandlungsabsicht und Verkauf entscheidend). In: IZ Immobilien Zeitung, Issue 1-2, 2017, P. 14, 2017

  • If the purchaser agrees to be bound by its offer to the developer for more than three months, this is part of the general terms and conditions of the seller, and as such incompatible with § 308 No. 1 of the German Civil Code even where the purchaser is granted a (limited) cancellation right. Commentary on the decision of the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) of 26 February 2016 – V ZR 208/14 (Bindet sich der Käufer beim Bauträger länger als 3 Monate an sein Angebot, ist dies als AGB des Verkäufers auch dann mit § 308 Nr. 1 BGB unvereinbar, wenn dem Käufer ein (inhaltlich beschränktes) Lösungsrecht eingeräumt wird)“, IZ Immobilien Zeitung, Issue 22, Page 14, 2016

  • A businessman is generally not protected from a subsequent sale by the purchaser of the real property on which the businessman is required to provide the construction. Commentary on the decision of the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) of 18 December 2014 – VII ZR 139/13 (Ein Unternehmer wird grundsätzlich nicht davor geschützt, dass der Besteller das Grundstück später veräußert, auf dem der Unternehmer die geschuldete Bauleistung zu erbringen hat.)“, IZ, Issue 12, Page 10, 2015

  • General terms and conditions stipulating that the offer made by the other party is to remain valid indefinitely and by which the user reserves the right to accept the offer at any time are incompatible with § 308 No. 1 of the German Civil Code, IZ, Issue 7, pp.12, 2014

  • Where the offer made by a purchaser of real property is subsequently accepted by the vendor in a separate deed, the time at which the purchaser becomes aware of a defect ruling out his warranty rights is determined by the time his offer was notarized, IZ, Issue 7, pp.12, 2013

  • Investments in nursing homes – How to secure investments in nursing homes the best way (Investments in Pflegeeinrichtungen – Pflegeheiminvestments besser absichern), IZ, Issue 47, pp.13-14, 2011

  • The tenant has the burden of argument and proof with regard to an allegation that the landlord breached the efficiency-principle in the statement of operating costs. Commentary on the decision of the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) of July 6, 2011, IZ, Issue 43, pp.12, 2011

  • The investor’s view – What investors of nursing homes need to consider (Der Blick des Investors – Worauf Pflegemarkt-Investoren achten müssen), medAmbiente care, Issue 3, p. 8-9, 2011