Experiences with alternative route rights / judgments

... but not over the yard.

Just imagine your three properties with a yard... as one... and then your driveway. Now someone comes along and wants to get to his property, namely this garden land. And legally he knows that he will also get a right of use. So you offer him this private path. Now he asks if he may also use your yard or front garden. He would much prefer to approach from the southwest rather than the southeast, for whatever reason. You say: no, take the private path and be happy. So why do you think that he will be assigned your front garden for access by the authorities just like that, when he already has the direct way where the drop curb is, and the private path also runs right there.

Aside from the fact that I cannot see into the future, like no one can, and no one knows what will happen, one should not assume the most complicated route as the nearest way and be confronted with the unlikely. That only makes you old.

Because there is no other way for the WBG to access the property.

Yes, but only within the framework of the current use. Any change, especially the construction of a residential building, is not covered by the emergency right of way. This right may only be exercised in an emergency (see #28). The WBG has no chance of developing the property against your will unless you manage to persuade the municipality to adopt a development plan or a redevelopment statute (or is there already something like that?). Then, in theory, it would be possible to expropriate you at some distant time in the future if your demands are too absurd.

or lawsuit

If the WBG does not have some scrap of paper hidden somewhere granting it a right of way from before the land registry system, no lawsuit will be necessary because there will be no building permit. The legal situation is so clear that no authority will put up with it (OT: Well, Scheuer burned a billion and is still allowed to carry on his mischief).

The plans and drafts were presented to one (!) of the three parties.

Do you belong to this party or was that a game of telephone? How exactly did that happen? Were those already building proposals? Did someone ring the bell and say, we will build this here soon? Did someone want a signature?

Therefore, an emergency right of way (or right of driving) is necessary.

No, not an emergency right of way, but a walking, driving, and maybe also a utility right. However, this must be negotiated and then recorded in public law (construction obligation) and private law (land register). Even with the scrap of paper, it must be negotiated; that could only affect enforceability. You could also charge fees of any amount for use and block the emergency way of access if not paid. P.S.: There is still a very unlikely possibility for the WBG: The way is publicly dedicated, whether formally or since ancient times (e.g., mentioned by Napoleon) is another matter. This is very rare for private paths but possible. In that case, no emergency right of way would be needed.

Did someone ring the bell and say that we're going to build this here soon? Did anyone want a signature?

I can very well imagine that someone from their side was approached to see if maybe a small deal for some cash could be made.

Attention: namely via the existing (accessible only by tractor) access road (yellow marking)

The yellow access road no longer exists on the plans, underground garage entrance and parking spaces only accessible via the courtyard area.

Plans are patient. How many plans have I seen here already...

Exactly. Send the WBG the link to this forum. They should post the plan here, preferably with "... final draft ..." in the title. You will see, the project will then disappear into thin air

Kaho and the others can easily do it!