Horizontal Property
Translation generated by AI. Access the original version
Action to claim the restitution of a common element altered by the owner
In a very small community of property owners, with only two dwellings (ground floor and top floor) and with 50% of shares each, a conflict arose over the building's roof . Although the deeds did not detail the common elements, the owners of the ground floor (plaintiffs) argued that this roof was a "mixed" common element, with a part that is not walkable and another part walkable intended for common facilities (e. g. antennas). According to them, the owners of the top floor (defendants) had built a shed or storage room shed or storage room construction be declared the work was illegal The defendants argued that the shed had been built by their parents
over 30 years ago for over 30 years (and, at least, its existence was known since 1992). They also said that that terrace had always been used that terrace because it could only be accessed from there, and that the plaintiffs had never gone up or taken care of its maintenance. With that argument, they maintained that the action was prescribed .
The court and the Provincial Court dismissed the lawsuit due to prescription , considering the action "personal" and applying a 15-year deadline. However, the Supreme Court (SC) upholds the appeal understanding that the plaintiffs were not only asking to "remove the work", but also to recover the corresponding property rights of all the co-owners. That's why it classified the action as real in nature and applied a deadline of 30 years , concluding that it had not prescribed (only 27 years had elapsed since the construction). The SC annuls the decision on prescription and orders the Provincial Court to issue a new judgment addressing the other issues.
Our professionals can provide you with proper advice on the operation of your community in accordance with regulatory requirements, as well as take appropriate actions to defend your rightsRELATED CONTENT
-
Elevator maintenance
Nullity of duration clauses and excessive notice in successive contracts This case deals with a typical contract for “preventive maintenance” of elevators, which are not fulfilled in a single day, but are provided month by month (what is called in law a successive contract). A maintenance company sued a community of owners because it decided to terminate the contract before the agreed term expired. The company claimed two things, on one hand, that unpaid invoices were paid; and, on the other, compensation for “breaking” the contract early. The conflict revolved around two clauses of the contract where one set a duration of 3 years and the other required a notice of 180 days (six months) in advance if one wanted to terminate the contract. The community argued that these conditions were abusive in the case of a consumer (in this case, the community itself). In the first instance, the court ruled in favor of the company, ordering the community to pay both the compensation for early termination and the outstanding invoices (in addition to interest and costs). However, on appeal, the Provincial Court of Málaga changed the criterion, declaring the 3-year duration clause and the 180-day notice clause null and abusive. What is the practical consequence? If those clauses are invalid, the company cannot rely on them to demand a penalty or compensation for having terminated the contract early. Nevertheless, the community must pay what it actually owed, the outstanding invoices for services already rendered. The Supreme Court confirmed this outcome, the duration and notice clauses are considered null, no compensation is due for ending the contract early, and only unpaid invoices are owed.
-
Urban leases
Does a reversible work by the tenant give the owner the right to terminate the contract?
-
Urban Leases
This website uses both its own and third-party cookies to analyze our services and navigation on our website in order to improve its contents (analytical purposes: measure visits and sources of web traffic). The legal basis is the consent of the user, except in the case of basic cookies, which are essential to navigate this website.