Nowadays, the entrance doors of many buildings, especially high-rise residences, are basically opened inward when delivered by real estate developers. However, in order to save indoor space during decoration, some homeowners, The door will be changed from inward opening to outward opening; in order to make the entrance door of their home look grand and classy, some people simply demolish the wall and make the door wider and taller. Is such a change allowed? Willfully changing the gate will lead to many lawsuits. Let\’s first look at a case decided by the People\’s Court of Fengtai District, Beijing.
Unauthorized change of the direction of the entrance door caused a neighborhood dispute
The dispute occurred between the homeowners of 1403 and 1404, who are closely adjacent to each other in a certain community. Due to the developer\’s design problems, their two houses were The entrance door is at a 90-degree angle, and when delivered by the developer, both doors open from the inside. The owner of 1404 said that when he took over the house from the developer, he negotiated to install an outward-opening ventilation door on the outside of the entrance door. Since the door of the owner of 1403\’s house opened inward at that time, it had no impact. Big, the two families have been living in peace for more than ten years. In 2023, the old owner of 1403 sold the house, and the new owner purchased it and started decorating it.
1403 After the new homeowner changed the door from inside to outside, the direct result was that his door was completely open. Finally, the door of 1404\’s house was almost completely blocked. At first, 1404\’s family just felt it was inconvenient to go out, but it was not necessary to pay attention to each other when the two families opened the door. Until one time, the two families opened the door at the same time, and the door handles appeared. Stuck and 1404 unable to go out.
When the negotiation fails, 1404The homeowner sued the homeowner of 1403 to the People\’s Court of Fengtai District, Beijing, demanding that the homeowner of 1403 restore the door to its original state, that is, change it to an inside-opening door. The homeowner of 1403 admitted that after he changed the direction of the door, it did affect the travel of 1404 family members, and also proposed a compromise solution.
1403 Homeowner: I said it is really not feasible and I will install a door closer. What is the concept of a door closer? After I open it, it will close by itself like a spring. This will not affect entry and exit. It is an instantaneous situation. The door will close immediately after entering or exiting.
Host 1404 said he did not accept this plan. He believed that it could not completely eliminate the safety hazards in his home.
The court held that after hearing , in 2023, without the consent of the homeowner of 1404, the homeowner of 1403 changed the entrance door from inside to outside, which indeed hindered the travel of 1404\’s family. In extreme cases, the door of 1404 may not be opened. cannot be opened. The national standard \”Uniform Standard for Design of Civil Buildings\” issued by the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of my country stipulates that when the doors opening to evacuation walkways and stairwells are fully opened, they should not affect the evacuation width of walkways and stairwells. The national standard \”Residential Design Code\” issued by the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development stipulates that doors that open outwards should not hinder public transportation and the opening of adjacent doors.
The court finally ruled that the homeowner of 1403 restored the entrance door of the house involved to an inward opening. The judgment has now been effectively fulfilled.
The neighbors who live next to each other have changed their entrance doors, influencing each other
In this case, the court ruled that defendant 1403, the homeowner, changed the door from the outside to the inside. . Some people have also noticed that the homeowner of plaintiff 1404 in this case also changed the door from inside opening to outside opening, but this judgment did not allow him to change it back. Why is this? The judge introduced that there is a principle in the Civil Procedure Law called \”don\’t sue and ignore\”. In this case, the homeowner of 1403 did not mention that changing the door of house 1404 to an outward-opening one affected his house, so the court There was no hearing on this issue. In the case below, after both heads of households changed the entrance doors from inside to outside, they affected each other, and the court finally ruled that both households should be restored to their original status.
This case occurred in Chaoyang District, Beijing. The plaintiff and the defendant lived in 1505 and 1507. The two families shared a corridor. The doors are at a 90 degree angle. Mr. Li, the owner of 1507, bought a first-hand house in 2004, and Mr. Sui, the owner of 1505, bought a second-hand house in 2020. During renovation, Mr. Sui changed the entrance door from inside to outside.
Judge of Beijing Third Intermediate People\’s Court Wang Tianshui: Mr. Sui’s change caused him to encounter Mr. Li twice when he opened the door. Mr. Li raised objections and said, Mr. Sui, you changed the door from inward to outward, which is not good for me. The family trip caused some damage, and he asked Mr. Sui to change the entrance door from the external push-out state back to the internal push-in state.
Since the decoration has been completed, it will be time-consuming and expensive to change the door back. Mr. Sui was not happy about the money, so the two families had a dispute. When Mr. Sui looked at the floor plan, he suddenly found that the door of the neighbor\’s house should not be close to his house. When he looked at other floors, he found that it was true. It was the neighbor who moved the door.
Judge of Beijing Third Intermediate People\’s Court Wang Tianshui: The No. 07 house owned by Mr. Li’s family is in a retracted state in the public access. In this way, the public access of the two families is actually in a relatively spacious state. However, around 2017, Mr. Li moved This door is an integral entrance door It was pushed out by about 55 centimeters, so that it was basically flush with the public passage. After the modification, the doors of the two houses formed a tight angle, which was basically a 90-degree angle. The doors were so close to each other. A status.
Due to the narrow walkway, Mr. Sui admitted that opening his door did affect his neighbors’ travel. However, he complained to his neighbors that they moved the entrance door 55 centimeters outward and occupied the public space. He immediately filed a counterclaim regarding the corridor, asking his neighbor Mr. Li to restore the entrance door to its original state.
The neighbor Mr. Li argued that he had the consent of the original owner of 1505 and the property management company when he moved the door.
After hearing, the court held that Article 288 of my country’s Civil Code It stipulates: Neighboring rights holders of real estate should correctly handle neighboring relationships in accordance with the principles of benefiting production, facilitating life, solidarity and mutual assistance, and being fair and reasonable. In this case, after Mr. Sui changed the entrance door of the house from inward opening to outward opening, This will make it difficult for Mr. Li\’s family, who live next door, to predict when their door will open, causing potential risks to Mr. Li\’s family\’s travel. Mr. Li expanded the entrance door of his home to the outside. The behavior will occupy the space of the public passage outside the entrance door of the two houses, and the behavior is not justified because of the consent of the neighbor\’s original property owner or the property company.
The court finally ruled that both families should stop their own actions.
Can those who pursue \”high-end households\” privately remove load-bearing walls and replace them with entrance doors? src=\”https://p3-sign.toutiaoimg.com/tos-cn-i-tjoges91tu/07bef4e249e83ba62bb717262384a4e4~tplv-tt-origin-web:gif.jpeg?_iz=58558&from=article.pc_detail&lk3s=953192f4&x-expires=1736821210&x-signature=cDHcuBc7pzvuIZ0OOyc5rt9eYTg%3D\”/>
The judge introduced that in many buildings, especially high-rise residences, setting the entrance door to open inward is not only a requirement of the national building design standards, but also a requirement of the fire protection law, because many The corridor of the building is relatively narrow. If the entrance door opens to the outside, it will In the event of a fire or other emergency, the passage will be blocked, thus threatening the personal and property safety of the residents. Therefore, although the house belongs to the owner, the entrance door cannot be modified as the owner wants. In real life. In order to appear grand, some people pursue the so-called \”big house\” by tearing down walls and making the entrance door wider and taller. So what should we do in the face of such renovation?
The judge said that it is not advisable to demolish walls privately to install wider and higher entrance doors, because generally, the exterior walls of the owner’s home are load-bearing walls, and such forced demolition and vandalism are not acceptable. Allowed.
The judge reminded that if the consequences of demolition of the load-bearing wall are serious and endanger the safety of the building, then the perpetrator will not only have to compensate for the loss and restore the original status quo. You may also face administrative penalties or even criminal penalties.
If someone does not demolish the wall, but just wants to decorate the door to make it look taller and more impressive, if the neighbor has an opinion or is worried about the bad feng shui of his home and takes it to court, how will the court deal with it? ?
Judge of Beijing Third Intermediate People\’s Court Wang Tianshui: Some of the parties involved in our cases will also use this reason to sue. For example, the setting of your windows or the setting of your door is not good for my home’s feng shui. However, in fact, the court’s judgment on the case is still Depending on whether his changes and settings will actually cause a nuisance or pose a potential danger to adjacent rights holders or other property owners, if it does not cause a nuisance, he will not be judged to remodel the door.
For Some owners occupy the public space in the corridor outside the door and place their own shoe cabinets, lockers, sundries, etc. If the neighbors fail to dissuade them and complain to the property management, the property management cannot solve the problem. If they file a lawsuit in court, what will the court do?
Judge of Beijing No. 3 Intermediate People\’s Court Wang Tianshui: If the owner does occupy a large portion of the common part, his occupation of the common part may cause obstruction to the normal passage of other residents, and may also cause obstruction to the fire escape or escape route. Blockage may also result in the property management company\’s property management, such as insurance Cleaning services, etc., and a series of nuisances. If these nuisances do exist, his neighbors can claim rights against him based on the neighbor relationship, and the property company can also ask him to stop the infringement based on the property service contract. , and then returned to the original state
Reprinted from: CCTV News
Source: Beijing News
本站内容及图片来自网络,版权归原作者所有,内容仅供读者参考,不承担相关法律责任,如有侵犯请联系我们：609448834
