In modern society, noise pollution has become one of the world's public hazards. Since 2003, 16 April of each year has been officially designated as World Noise Day. In recent years, disputes between the owners of neighboring immovable properties and the owners of the right to use them have occurred frequently due to the infringement of immeasurable objects such as noise. When you can't stand the argument, how do you defend your rights?
1. Can noise disturbance evidence be based solely on audio recording?
Brief facts of the case
Mr. Zhang and Ms. Liang were originally upstairs and downstairs neighbors, and Mr. Zhang rented out all his House 305. Ms. Liang said that tenant No. 305 maliciously created noise, especially around 6 or 7 o'clock in the morning, knocked on the floor many times, children played with toys, ran, etc., and sometimes threw things on the ground after 11 o'clock at night, there was noise beyond the normal neighboring relationship, causing it to be disturbed, and diagnosed as an anxiety disorder, so he sued the court, asking Mr. Zhang to stop the infringement and compensate for the loss of 5,000 yuan.
Mr. Zhang argued that Ms Leung had no evidence to prove that the noise generated by the tenant exceeded the noise standard set by the state. Ms Leung has always been dissatisfied with her and her tenants, and she rented out her house to three different tenants before and after, and Ms. Leung complained about noise, went to the door to harass, and beat the tenant in serious cases, causing the tenant to withdraw from the rent. Ms. Leung's repeated complaints on the grounds of "noise" were entirely her own problems, so she disagreed with all of Ms. Leung's claims.
During the trial, the court explained that Ms. Leung did not apply for an appraisal of the noise-related issues.
After trial, the court held that Ms. Leung claimed that her neighboring rights had been infringed on the grounds that House 305 was causing noise, and the main evidence submitted by her was a self-recorded audio recording. Judging from the situation reflected in the recording, the noise made by the upstairs residents did not clearly exceed the reasonable range of the family life with children. Ms. Liang also did not submit other evidence such as reports from professional testing institutions to prove that the noise made by the resident exceeded the national standard of the Acoustic Environment Quality Standard, and ms. Liang was unable to prove that Mr. Zhang had infringed, nor could she prove that there was a causal relationship between the damage result claimed by her claim and Mr. Zhang, so all of Ms. Liang's litigation claims were rejected.
After the verdict was pronounced, Ms. Leung appealed and the original judgment was upheld in the second instance.
Judges interpret the law
Noise pollution refers to the phenomenon of exceeding noise emission standards or failing to take prevention and control measures in accordance with law to generate noise and interfere with the normal life, work and study of others. Article 294 of the Civil Code stipulates that the owner of the right to immovable property shall not dispose of solid waste in violation of state regulations and discharge harmful substances such as atmospheric pollutants, water pollutants, soil pollutants, noise, optical radiation, electromagnetic radiation and so on.
As a plaintiff who advocates the exclusion of obstruction in a neighbor dispute case, he shall bear the burden of proof of "who claims and who proves". The content of the proof mainly includes: (1) there is a neighboring relationship between the two parties to the immovable property; (2) the neighboring obligor has committed a neighboring nuisance; (3) the plaintiff's neighboring rights and interests have been infringed; (4) there is a causal relationship between the defendant's conduct and the plaintiff's neighboring nuisance.
In practice, the party claiming to be harmed by noise will generally submit its own audio, which is affected by the recording time, place, human factors, equipment factors and other factors, and the other party generally does not recognize the authenticity, legality and purpose of proof of the audio. Since the tolerance of sound is not the same for each individual, the physiological impact of different decibels on the same individual, or the sound of the same decibel on different individuals, is highly professional, and it is necessary to entrust a professional appraisal agency to identify. If the noise standards stipulated by the State are exceeded, the neighbor is obliged to stop the infringement, remove the obstruction and compensate for the loss.
It should be noted that in real life, it is inevitable to produce sound upstairs and downstairs, and within reasonable limits, downstairs residents have the obligation to tolerate sound. Of course, upstairs residents should have a higher duty of care, control the sound within a reasonable range, and avoid the downstairs residents suffering from sound troubles.
2. Rent losses caused by housing noise can also be claimed
Brief facts of the case
Mr. Zhang has an office commercial house under his name, and next door is the place of operation of The Universe Company. Due to the noise emitted by the computer and other electronic equipment of the universe company, and the operation was uninterrupted around the clock, Mr. Zhang's tenant terminated the lease contract. When Mr. Zhang rented out his house, the interested customers also failed to sign a contract on the grounds that they could not accept the noise, resulting in the delay in renting out the house. Mr. Zhang sued Cosmos Company to the court, demanding that it take fundamental measures to completely eliminate the noise pollution in the house, and compensate for the loss of rent of the house, and bear the appraisal fee and litigation costs of the case.
Cosmos argued that the noise in the computer room met the requirements of the environmental protection department and did not affect the office. There are many reasons why a house cannot be rented, including rent, decoration, location, etc. Mr. Zhang's house is not rented and there is no direct causal relationship with him. Moreover, his company has taken active measures to reduce noise, so it does not agree with all of Mr. Zhang's litigation claims.
In the lawsuit, Mr. Zhang applied for a forensic determination on the impact of the noise generated by the computer room of Cosmos Company on the next door. Appraisal: When the computer room is running during the day and night, the noise measurement results of the three detection points next door do not meet the noise emission standards stipulated by the state.
After trial, the court held that, according to the appraisal opinion, the sound generated by the air conditioner and server placed by the universe company exceeded the relevant national standards, causing noise pollution, and failed to take effective measures, causing damage to the normal production and life of others, and Mr. Zhang asked the universe company to stop the infringement and rectify and eliminate the noise pollution in the room, which had a factual basis, and the court supported it. The housing lease contract signed by Mr. Zhang and the outsider was terminated due to noise interference, resulting in the loss of his rent, and the universe company should compensate for this, and the specific amount was determined by the court in combination with the evidence in the file. In summary, the court ordered Cosmos to conduct sound insulation treatment on the computer room again, reduce the noise to within the national standard and compensate Mr. Zhang for rent losses of more than 370,000 yuan.
After the verdict was pronounced, The Universe Company appealed, and the original judgment was upheld in the second instance.
Judges interpret the law
In a neighboring relationship, the holders of the rights of the adjacent immovable property should bear a certain degree of tolerance, and for minor infringements from the adjacent immovable property, the necessary tolerance should be given if the limit of tolerance is not exceeded. However, if the standard stipulated by the state is exceeded, the infringed immovable property rights holder has the right to request the infringer to stop the infringement, eliminate the danger, remove the obstruction, and compensate for the loss. In this case, Mr. Zhang determined the existence of noise obstruction through appraisal and fulfilled the corresponding burden of proof. As the actual user of the house, the Universe Company should bear legal responsibility for the noise generated by the house involved in the case, so the court ruled that the Universe Company should remove the obstruction and compensate for the loss.
Third, the way to protect rights in disputes over noise issues needs to be rational
Brief facts of the case
Mr. Cai and Mr. Zhang are upstairs and downstairs neighbors. At about 23:00 on the evening of a certain day, because he felt that the noise upstairs disturbed the people, Mr. Zhang came to the door to find Mr. Cai theory, and the two sides clashed, and Mr. Cai slashed Mr. Zhang with a knife, which was identified as a minor injury of the second degree. Mr. Cai was later taken criminal coercive measures and prosecuted in court on suspicion of intentional injury.
After trial, the court held that Mr. Cai's intentional injury to another person's body, causing a minor injury to a person of the second degree, his behavior has constituted the crime of intentional injury, in view of Mr. Cai's truthful confession of his crime after arriving at the case, the attitude of admitting guilt is better, and the court has given him a lenient punishment in accordance with law. In the end, Mr. Cai was sentenced to seven months in prison for intentional injury.
In another criminal case, Mr. Peng threw empty beer bottles and unopened bottles of beer out of the window because he was dissatisfied with the noise of leisure and entertainment in the community square affecting his rest. Although there were no casualties or property damage, Mr. Peng's conduct was suspected of endangering public safety by dangerous means, and after the case was prosecuted to the court, the court held after trial that Mr. Peng endangered public safety by other dangerous methods, and his behavior had constituted the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous methods. In view of the fact that Mr. Peng truthfully confessed the facts of the crime after his return to the case, admitted guilt and repented of his crime, and his criminal act had not yet caused serious consequences, the court finally sentenced Mr. Peng to three years' imprisonment with a suspended sentence of three years.
Judges interpret the law
The above two cases were caused by noise problems, and the perpetrator could not rationally defend his rights, which ultimately led to criminal liability. So in the face of noise infringement, how should you protect your legitimate rights and interests?
The Law of the People's Republic of China on the Prevention and Control of Noise Pollution, which came into effect on June 5, 2022, stipulates that in the organization or carrying out entertainment, fitness and other activities in public places such as streets, squares, parks, etc., the regulations of the manager of public places on the activity area, time period, volume, etc., and effective measures shall be taken to prevent noise pollution; the use of audio equipment in violation of regulations shall not be used to generate excessive volume.
The use of household appliances, musical instruments or other activities in home places shall control the volume or take other effective measures to prevent noise pollution. Families and their members should cultivate good habits to reduce noise generation, take public transportation, keep pets and other daily activities as much as possible to avoid noise interference with the surrounding personnel, mutual understanding and mutual accommodation to resolve noise disputes, and jointly maintain the quality of the acoustic environment.
In the face of noise disturbance behavior in social life, you can reflect the situation to the neighborhood committee, village committee, industry committee, property company, etc. of the community where you are located, or you can call the 12345 citizen hotline, and the above institutions will discourage and mediate in the middle; if the dissuasion or mediation is ineffective, you can report or complain to the urban management, environmental protection, public security and other departments.
(All pseudonyms in the article)
Source: Haidian Court, Beijing, China Law Popularization