The owner tampered with the entrance door and affected the neighbor\’s access

This newspaper reported (Reporter Zhou Ruiping, Correspondent Yu Shengyun) The owner widened and raised the entrance door without authorization, and changed it from inside opening to outside opening, which affected the neighbor\’s family\’s access. Recently, the Intermediate People\’s Court of Hefei City, Anhui Province issued a second-instance judgment on this neighboring rights dispute case, upholding the first-instance judgment of the Baohe District People\’s Court of Hefei City and ordering the defendant Li to restore the entrance door to its original state.

Liu and Li purchased houses on the 6th floor of Building 5 in a community in Hefei City in 2010 and lived next to each other. In September 2023, Li failed to report to the community property company, and without Liu\’s consent, he widened and increased the height of his entrance door, and at the same time changed the entrance door from inward opening to outward opening.

Because the two houses are adjacent to each other, when Li’s renovated entrance door was fully opened, the exit of Liu’s house was blocked. Liu\’s family members communicated and tried to dissuade Li\’s family members to no avail. Later, Liu reported the situation to the property management company and the community committee. He admitted that there were young children and elderly people at home, and the safety and fire hazards were greater after the door was blocked. At the end of September of the same year, the property management company sent a rectification letter to Li, requiring him to rectify the entrance door as soon as possible, but Li ignored it. Afterwards, the neighborhood committee and the property management company organized and coordinated many times to no avail. Liu then filed a lawsuit with the court, requesting that the defendant Li immediately stop the infringement of changing the door without authorization and causing damage to himself, restore the size of the entrance door to the size before the transformation, and change it back to the inside opening, and at the same time bear the consequences of the adjustment of his rights. filing fees and litigation fees.

After the trial, the court held that Article 288 of the Civil Code stipulates that neighboring rights holders of real estate should correctly handle neighboring relationships in accordance with the principles of conducive to production, convenient life, solidarity and mutual assistance, and fairness and reasonableness. . Article 272 stipulates that owners have the right to possess, use, benefit from and dispose of the exclusive parts of their buildings. The owner shall not endanger the safety of the building or damage the legitimate rights and interests of other owners when exercising their rights. Article 5.8.5 of the Ministry of Construction\’s \”Residential Design Code\” (GB50096-2011) stipulates that outward-opening doors should not hinder public transportation and the opening of adjacent doors. In this case, when Li\’s renovated entrance door was fully open, it almost completely blocked the entry door of Liu\’s family, which affected the normal access of Liu\’s family and also caused certain safety hazards.

To sum up, the court held that Li’s behavior of changing the direction and size of the entrance door without authorization was improper and should be restored to its original state. The plaintiff, despite the failure of multi-party coordination, incurred reasonable expenditures in obtaining the defendant\’s identity information for the purpose of litigation, and has provided evidence, which should be supported.

Therefore, the court of first instance ruled that the defendant Li would restore the entrance door to its original state, pay the plaintiff Liu the adjustment fee, and bear the litigation costs. Li was dissatisfied and appealed. After hearing the case, the Hefei Intermediate People\’s Court rejected the appeal and upheld the original judgment.

The judge reminded

Being kind and kind to neighbors is a traditional virtue of the Chinese nation, and one must abide by public ethics when dealing with neighbors. Everyone has the right to pursue a comfortable life, but the exercise of rights also has boundaries. The boundaries of rights should not be exceeded at will, and the legitimate rights and interests of others should not be harmed. Neighbors should carry forward the traditional virtues of the Chinese nation in their daily lives, set a good example for their children, and shape kindness.Harmonious family tradition.

Source: People’s Court Newspaper

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

(0)
华夏门网的头像华夏门网
上一篇 2025年1月10日 10:33:04
下一篇 2025年1月10日 10:36:08

相关推荐

  • 入户门正对储物间门!入户门

    入户门正对储物间门。 根据传统风水学的理论,房屋正门对着储物间门可能会带来一些不利影响。如果入户门与储物间门直接对冲,可能会导致财运流失或者物资有损坏的情况,并给家人的健康和安全带来一定的风险。因此,如果入户门正对储物间门,需要采取一些措施来化解这种影响。以下是几种值得尝试的方法: ·一、空间隔断。可以通过设置隔断,如屏风、移动书架等物品,将储物间和入户门的…

    入户门 2024年6月8日
    4440
  • 开发商自带的“入户门”要不要换?别纠结,这样做就对了

    现在很多小区的新房,即便是毛坯房,一般都是自带入户门的,但是在装修的时候,有的人就担心了,开发商给装的门质量怎么样呢?有没有必要把开发商装的门给换掉呢?有很多人对此比较纠结,那么,我们今天就来详细的讨论讨论这个话题吧。 1、开发商装的入户门要不要换? 要不要换,需要看你的需求。 如果你仅仅是为了防小偷,那还是建议你不要换了,没有这个必要。就算是你换了一个差不…

    入户门 2023年11月5日
    1260
  • 入户门改成向外开,法院判决:改回来

    装修房屋时 为了最大化利用空间 不顾邻居反对 将入户门朝向 由“向内开”改为“向外开” 合法吗? 01 基本案情 近日,浙江省杭州市临平区人民法院依法公开审理了一起因邻居擅改入户门朝向引起的排除妨害纠纷案件,判决恢复原状。 据了解,李某与刘某、张某系同一小区同一楼层的邻居,小区交付时,两套房屋的入户门均为朝内开。刘某、张某在进行房屋装修时,因房屋系小户型,设…

    入户门 2023年12月22日
    330
  • 消防规范上对于住宅入户门的相关要求

    1 防火通规和建规中的住宅户门宽度 《建筑防火通用规范》GB 55037-2022第7.1.4条规定,疏散出口门、室外疏散楼梯的净宽度均不应小于0.80m;住宅建筑中直通室外地面的住宅户门的净宽度不应小于0.80m。 条文中的“直通室外地面的住宅户门”感觉表达不是很清晰,可能会被理解为住宅底层直通室外地面的户门,而实际要表达的当是所有楼层的户门。 《建筑设计…

    入户门 2024年4月12日
    3430
  • 新房買瞭之後,為什麼建議更換“入戶門”?內行人給出答案明白瞭

    我們都知道入戶門關系著傢裡的人身和財產安全,所以在選擇和安裝入戶門的時候,都會非常謹慎,於現階段買的房子,基本上都是商品房開發商統一安裝好瞭入戶門,所以大多數的業主都沒有太關註入戶門的問題。 網上有人說,開發商安裝的入戶門應該要更換掉,也有人說沒有必換掉入戶門,畢竟是一筆開支啊!那麼開發商安裝的入戶門,到底要怎麼處理呢?為什麼有人建議更換入戶門? 首先內行人…

    入户门 2024年12月9日
    490

联系我们

400-800-8888

在线咨询: QQ交谈

邮件:[email protected]

工作时间:周一至周五,9:30-18:30,节假日休息

关注微信