On the 17th, Beijing Satellite TV’s “Step Forward” program talked about such a thing: most of the residents in a certain district are elderly people who are not leaving the crutches. Thanks to the old community remediation plan, they can now install elevators. However, because the first-floor resident Liu disagreed, he was unable to implement it, so he went to the program to mediate. After all the reasons given by Mr. Liu were "solved", they revealed the truth against the installation of the elevator: it was because the wife was seriously ill 20 years ago, and thanks to his careful care, Mr. Liu worried about adding The engineering noise of the elevator will affect the condition of the wife, so they strongly disagree. So the media intercepted this video and matched the title of "For you against the world", and also called on netizens "This Tanabata, praise for this love."
This kind of love for "fighting the world for you" should not be praised, and netizens have a controversy. However, there is a second question that arises: Is there any “veto” for everyone in the old building? Shouldn't it be "one household is off, and all households are open"?
In this regard, from the current regulations, there is a bit of a taste. In some places, the regulations actually give the owners of the building a “veto power”. As long as one owner resolutely opposes, the wishes of all the other owners will “bubble” and “100-1=0” will appear.
The provisions of the law are not very clear. One way of saying that, according to the provisions of the Property Law, 100% of the owners should agree to install the elevator. The basis is that the property rights are owned by the individual and the principle of obeying the majority is not allowed to ensure the personal property is not infringed. In matters such as the installation of an elevator, the personal property rights cannot be violated because of the consent of the majority. However, some people disagree with this statement. The basis is that Article 12 of the Regulations on Property Management stipulates that elevators in multi-storey residential buildings in old districts will be equipped with two “two-thirds”, that is, they should agree to install elevators. Owners who have more than two-thirds of the total area of the building and more than two-thirds of the total number of owners agree.
I think the above two views can be unified in the principle of the property law. On the one hand, we cannot let the "one vote" veto the interests of the majority, we must adhere to the "two-thirds" of the "Property Management Regulations", as long as this requirement is met, the installation of the elevator should be approved; Most people also have no right to veto the property rights of "one vote", but also to maintain the integrity of the property rights of those who do not agree to install elevators.
However, maintaining the property rights of the opponents does not necessarily mean canceling the installation of the elevator, but taking other measures. Because this does not affect the basic fact of ownership, it may only cause damage to property rights. According to the provisions of the Property Law, first, “the right to nuisance or may impair the property right, the right holder may request to remove the nuisance or eliminate the danger”, and take measures to solve the factors affecting the property rights, such as trying to solve the problem of lighting, noise, etc. Secondly, "infringement of property rights, causing damage to the right holder, the right holder may request damages, or may request other civil liabilities", and compensate for various forms of contradiction that cannot be completely resolved after taking measures. The specific way of resolving contradictions can be solved through reconciliation, mediation, arbitration, litigation, etc.
The above is of course the author's point of view. In view of the different regulations at present, the national housing construction department should introduce uniform regulations to guide the installation of elevators in the old buildings, and the basic principle is to adhere to the "two-thirds" principle of the "Property Management Regulations", while maintaining multi-channel Disapproval of the property rights.
AOYAMA ELEVATOR GLOBAL LTD.
Contact information in Japan
ADD: No. 17, Osukannon, Nagoya Southwest District, Aichi Prefecture, Japan
TEL: +81 52 4564462