Renting out property comes with many risks.
It’s not always leaks or unpaid rent—
sometimes, something far more serious happens:
A non-natural death occurs inside the property,
and the unit becomes what people commonly call a “stigmatized property.”
When this happens, landlords usually care about two things:
- Will the property value drop?
- Can damages be claimed from the tenant or any related party?
Unfortunately, the law does not provide a clear-cut answer.
It’s not that compensation is impossible—
it’s that it is very difficult to say it will definitely be granted.
What Does the Law Say?
Civil Code Article 184, Paragraph 1:
“A person who, intentionally or negligently, unlawfully infringes upon the rights of another shall be liable for damages. The same shall apply where a person intentionally causes damage to another in a manner contrary to good morals.”
✨ Plain Explanation: This is the basic rule for tort liability.
If a landlord wants to claim damages due to a property becoming stigmatized, this is usually the starting point.
However, the challenge is this:
The impact of a stigmatized property is mainly about perception and psychological devaluation, not physical damage.
Whether this counts as a legally recognized “infringement of rights” is not always clear.
⚖️ Legal Source: Civil Code Article 184 – Law.moj.gov.tw
Civil Code Article 433:
“Where the leased property is damaged or destroyed due to causes attributable to a cohabitant of the lessee or a third party permitted by the lessee to use or derive benefit from the leased property, the lessee shall be liable for damages.”
✨ Plain Explanation: If the incident was caused not by the tenant, but by a cohabitant or someone allowed to use the property, the tenant may still be held responsible in certain situations.
But the law refers to “damage or destruction,”
and stigmatized property cases often involve no physical damage—this creates legal uncertainty.
⚖️ Legal Source: Civil Code Article 433 – Law.moj.gov.tw
Civil Code Article 444, Paragraph 2:
“The lessee shall be liable for damages arising from causes attributable to the sublessee.”
✨ Plain Explanation: If the property was subleased, the original tenant may still be liable—even if the subtenant was the one involved.
⚖️ Legal Source: Civil Code Article 444 – Law.moj.gov.tw
Civil Code Article 1148, Paragraph 2:
“Heirs shall be liable for the debts of the decedent only to the extent of the property inherited.”
✨ Plain Explanation: If liability existed, it does not disappear simply because the person has passed away. Instead, responsibility shifts to the estate.
This means landlords may theoretically claim against the estate, but heirs do not have to pay out of pocket—they are only liable within the value of what they inherited.
⚖️ Legal Source: Civil Code Article 1148 – Law.moj.gov.tw
Why Is It So Difficult to Claim Damages?
The real issue is not whether the property value dropped,
but whether the loss can be legally recognized as compensable damage.
There are three main challenges:
1️⃣ Psychological stigma, not physical damage
The property itself may be physically intact,
but its market value is affected by a non-natural death.
Whether this type of loss is legally compensable remains controversial.
2️⃣ Unclear nature of the act
Whether a suicide can be classified as
“intentional or negligent infringement of another’s rights” is debatable.
It is not automatic that Article 184 applies.
3️⃣ Unclear responsible party
The person involved may be:
- The tenant
- A cohabitant
- A guest or occupant
- A subtenant
Each scenario involves different legal rules and affects who the landlord may pursue.
So, Who Can the Landlord Claim Against?
The key question is simple:
✝️ Who caused the incident?
In general:
- If it was the tenant → claim may be based on tort liability
- If it was a cohabitant or third party → the tenant may still be liable
- If it was a subtenant → the original tenant may be liable
- If the person has passed away → claims may shift to the estate
But there is one crucial point:
✝️ The issue is not who to claim against first, but whether the loss is legally compensable at all.
If a court does not recognize the decrease in value as compensable damage,
then it may not matter who the claim is directed at.
If the Tenant Has Passed Away, Does Liability Disappear?
Not necessarily.
If liability could have existed,
it does not vanish simply because the person has died.
Instead, it may be handled through the estate,
and liability is limited to the value of inherited assets—not the heirs’ personal funds.
But the real key is not whether the person is alive or not.
✝️ The real issue is whether the landlord’s loss is legally recognized as compensable damage.
If the court does not accept the claim,
then even a living party may not be held liable.
On the other hand,
if the damage is recognized,
it may still be addressed through the estate.
🧛♂️Related Read: How Should Landlords Handle Property Left Behind After the Move-Out Inspection in Taiwan?
🦇 Related Read: After a Property Sale in Taiwan, Who Must Return the Security Deposit — the Former or the New Landlord?
⚰️Related Read: How Should a Co-Living Lease Be Signed in Taiwan?
🏰 Related Read: Who Is Liable for Fire Damage in Taiwan?
Conclusion
The decrease in value caused by a stigmatized property is very real.
However, it is not automatically recognized as compensable damage under the law.
The challenge is not whether a loss exists,
but whether the law recognizes it—and who should bear responsibility.
In most cases,
landlords are not entirely barred from claiming damages,
but it is difficult to obtain a clear answer without litigation.
Ultimately, each case depends on its specific facts and judicial interpretation.
