Tenant's Property Alteration Prohibition: Command vs. Provisional Measure Procedure Appeal

Following the termination of a lease agreement, the court initially granted an urgent order prohibiting the tenant from altering the property's condition, which the tenant argued was improperly based on the command procedure ($\S 226$ ZPO) rather than the more specific provisional measure procedure ($\S 227$ ZPO). The appellate court reasoned that both the command procedure and provisional measures are distinct forms of interim relief enforceable summarily; specifically, claims for injunctive relief can be provisionally enforced under either $\S 226$ ZPO when the factual and legal situation is clear, or under $\S 227$ ZPO if necessary to avert irreparable harm, concluding that $\S 227$ ZPO is not a special provision that supersedes $\S 226$ ZPO, and thus the initial decision was justifiable under the command procedure given the established facts, or alternatively, under $\S 227$ ZPO.