Two neighboring families sued the Pingchao People's Court of the Tongzhou District People's Court of Nantong City for road construction, and President Gu Huihua inspected the scene. Photo by Chen Jiamin
In order to resolve the dispute over the demarcation of neighborhood houses, the judges of the Qidong Municipal People's Court went to the front line and conducted on-site inspection and measurement. Photo by Wang Junbo
Two neighboring families sued the Pingchao People's Court of the Tongzhou District People's Court of Nantong City for road construction, and President Gu Huihua inspected the scene. Photo by Chen Jiamin In order to resolve the dispute over the demarcation of neighborhood houses, the judge of the Qidong Municipal People's Court went to the front line and conducted on-site inspection and measurement. Photo by Wang Junbo
Guide
As the saying goes, "Distant relatives are not as good as close neighbors, and close neighbors are not as good as the door". Neighboring parties are not only the relationship between equal civil subjects, but also a mutual assistance and cooperation relationship. Neighbor disputes seem simple and the subject matter is not large, but for the parties involved in the litigation, the neighbors do not look up and look down, and once the adjacent obstruction occurs, it will have a practical impact on the people's peace and contentment. To this end, the Intermediate People's Court of Nantong City, Jiangsu Province, recently sorted out a number of typical cases of neighboring rights disputes that have been concluded, analyzed and gave opinions and suggestions on the tolerance obligation and proof responsibility in neighbor dispute cases.
Neighbors should be tolerated to install windows of normal size
Mr. Chen and Mr. and Mrs. Wang are neighbors up and downstairs. Chen lives on the 17th floor, and Mr. and Mrs. Wang live on the 16th floor. Chen's children in the family are still young, in order to prevent children from climbing and causing safety hazards, Chen has installed stainless steel anti-theft windows outside the west room on the south side and outside the balcony on the south side, of which the bottom of the anti-theft window outside the west room is located at the upper end of the canopy in the west room of Wang's couple's home, and the anti-theft window outside the balcony is located at the top of the prominent waist line of the floor.
Mr. and Mrs. Wang believe that the prominent anti-theft window makes them feel very depressed, and the flowerpot placed by Mr. and Mrs. Chen on the anti-theft window often leaks, resulting in the dirty quilt dried by Mr. and Mrs. Wang's home, so they sued the Chongchuan District People's Court in Nantong City, requiring Chen to immediately remove the anti-theft window of his house, stop infringing on the rights and interests of Mr. and Mrs. Wang, and eliminate the obstacle to the life of Mr. and Mrs. Wang.
In court, Chen argued that his installation of anti-theft windows was for the safety of his own children and did not affect the lighting of Wang and his wife's home. Their own flowerpots were not placed on the anti-theft window, and Wang and his wife had no evidence to prove that the flowerpots of Chen's family leaked and soiled the quilt.
After trial, the Chongchuan District Court held that, according to the photos provided by the parties, the size of the stainless steel anti-theft window involved in the case did not exceed the reasonable range for Chen's normal use and convenient residence, nor did it exceed the reasonable limit for Chen to protect his own living safety. Although his behavior may objectively have a certain impact on the lighting and so on Mr. and Mrs. Wang, Mr. and Mrs. Wang did not provide evidence to prove that Mr. and Mrs. Chen's behavior has clearly exceeded the scope of the tolerance obligations that the neighboring party, mr. and Mrs. Wang, should bear. Therefore, Chen's act of installing anti-theft windows does not constitute infringement in the sense of tort law. Therefore, the judgment rejected the litigation claims of Wang and his wife.
Wang appealed, and the second instance upheld the original judgment.
■ Judges speak about the code
According to the Provisions of the Civil Code, the resolution of conflicts of rights between the owners of neighboring immovable property should follow the principles of favorable production, convenient life, solidarity and mutual assistance, fairness and reasonableness, adhere to the principle of benevolence with neighbors, advocate empathy, and take into account the interests of all parties.
The contiguous relationship system aims to regulate conflicts of interest between the right holders of immovable property adjacent to each other, to make it clear that one party provides certain convenience to the other party, and to tolerate the harm caused by the provision of convenience to itself. Several articles of the Property Rights Part of the Civil Code refer to "providing the necessary convenience", as well as "no violation of regulations" or "no endangerment of security", and from the perspective of the scope of tolerance and the boundary that others must not cross, the obligation of tolerance is taken as the criterion for judging the boundary of the exercise of rights in adjacent relations.
At the heart of the adjacent relationship is the obligation of tolerance, which limits the right to exclude nuisance claims so that the owner of adjacent immovable property may not therefore exercise the right to exclude nuisance claims. In this case, Chen installed anti-theft windows for the safety of himself and his family, although it affected the lighting of Mr. and Mrs. Wang to a certain extent, but it belonged within the reasonable limits of the tolerance obligation that Mr. and Mrs. Wang should bear. Under normal circumstances, as long as the anti-theft window is installed in a proper location, neighboring parties should tolerate it in the spirit of mutual understanding and mutual accommodation, so as to give full play to the effectiveness of their property value and maintain harmonious neighborhood relations.
Here, it should be pointed out that as Chen Mou, he should also think in a different position, put himself in the shoes of Wang and his wife, and properly handle disputes between the two sides from the perspective of convenient life, unity and mutual assistance, fairness and reasonableness, and make efforts to create a harmonious neighborhood relationship and create a beautiful community environment.
Improvement of the opening of the door to obstruct traffic should be restored to the original state
Mr. and Mrs. Peng and Mr. Zhao's family live on the same floor, and there are three households on the east, middle and west of the floor, of which Mr. and Mrs. Peng are intermediate households and Zhao's family is a west household. The original design of the entrance door of the middle door was an east-side interior opening, and the original door frame was trapped in the wall. When Mr. and Mrs. Peng mou were renovating, they changed the original entrance door to the west side of the opening type, and the renovated door frame protruded from the wall, and when the entrance door was opened at 90 degrees, the width of the public passage was only 58 centimeters, affecting the passage. There are old people and children in Zhao's home, the old man's legs and feet are inconvenient, the children run and jump at will, and it is easy to cause collisions when passing through the door opened by Peng and his wife, and there is a fire hazard in the narrow passage. After the communication between the two sides was fruitless, Zhao sued Peng and his wife to the Rugao Municipal People's Court, demanding that they restore the original state of the entrance door.
Mr. and Mrs. Peng believe that the law does not explicitly prohibit commercial housing residents from installing external doors, and they only open the entrance door when their families enter and leave, and close at other times, which does not hinder the passage. Zhao said that there are children in the family who are easy to cause bumps, and Zhao should strengthen supervision or install cat eyes to ensure safety.
After trial, the Rugao court held that Peng and his wife had changed the original east side of the open door to the west side of the open door without the consent of the neighbors, and the owner's manual of the community clearly told the owner not to move the position of the doors and windows at will during decoration, and not to affect the normal use and environmental quality of the neighboring households. The renovated door frame has been prominently displayed in the wall, changing the original design, Peng and his wife's family occupies a public aisle when opening the entrance door, which affects the normal access of the west household, and also causes certain safety hazards, which is not the "strengthening observation through the cat's eye" defended by Peng and his wife. Therefore, Zhao mou, based on the right of neighboring, asked Peng and his wife to restore the entrance door to the original state, which was based on the law. The court ruled in support of his claim.
Mr. and Mrs. Peng appealed, and the second-instance trial upheld the original judgment.
■ Judges speak about the code
According to the provisions of the Civil Code, the neighboring parties of immovable property shall correctly handle the neighboring relationship in accordance with the spirit of convenient life and solidarity and mutual assistance, and if they cause obstacles to the neighboring parties, they shall stop the infringement, remove the obstruction, and restore the original state.
When the owners of immovable property in an adjacent relationship occupy and use immovable property, it is inevitable that they will have a certain impact on each other. Therefore, there is an obligation of cooperation and tolerance between right holders. However, if a party exceeds the boundaries of its rights, causes inconvenience or serious prejudice to the neighboring party and exceeds the scope of the tolerance obligation, it constitutes infringement. The entrance of the commercial housing community is designed by the design unit and approved by the relevant departments, which not only considers the convenience of the owner but also ensures the safety of the passers-by in the adjacent relationship. In this case, the dispute aisle is the necessary passageway for the east and west households on the floor, which is relatively narrow in itself, and Mr. and Mrs. Peng, as the middle household, are facing the public entrance and exit of the three households, based on this, the entrance door of the middle household is originally designed to open inward on the east side.
In a neighboring legal relationship, the neighboring parties have an obligation to provide a minimum of facilitation and tolerance. Neighbors should adhere to the people-oriented approach and give full consideration to the convenience of the neighboring rights holders; Reasonably limit or extend one's own rights to facilitate the lives of neighboring rights holders; Reasonable arrangements should be made to minimize the inconvenience caused to the lives of neighboring rights holders, and their own convenience should not be based on the inconvenience of neighboring rights holders. In this case, after the on-site investigation of the court of first instance, after Peng and his wife changed the orientation of the entrance door, it not only affected the normal entry and exit of the western residents, but also had potential safety hazards, and the owner's manual of the community also clearly informed the owner not to move the position of the doors and windows at will during decoration, and not to affect the normal use of the neighboring households. Based on this, the court found that Zhao's claim was established and ruled that Mr. and Mrs. Peng would restore the entrance to the house to its original state.
Prosecuting neighbors for infringement requires evidence of causation
Liu and Zhou live in the same building, Liu lives on the 5th floor, and Zhou lives on the 8th floor. Zhou Mou loves to raise flowers, and set up flower trellises on the outside of the three balconies in the south, west and north of his residence for raising flowers and watering daily.
On July 16, 2018, Liu reported to the police that zhou's home on the 8th floor was watering flowers and water dripped into his home. After the police came out, they found that the flowerpot of Zhou's family did not have a pot holder, and there was indeed a situation of dripping water, and it was recommended that Zhou install a pot holder in the pot. Liu believes that Zhou's long-term watering and dripping cause damage to the walls and floors in his home, and he should bear the liability for compensation. Liu then sued the court demanding that Zhou compensate for the loss of 4100 yuan and remove the three flower trellises in the south, west and north.
Zhou argued that among the residents of Liu's upstairs, not only his family raised flowers to water, and the damage to the walls and floors in Liu's home had nothing to do with his own flowering behavior.
After trial, the Chongchuan District Court held that according to the photos provided by Liu, there was indeed improper watering of flowers by the upstairs residents. Zhou Mou, as an upstairs resident, should pay attention to avoiding a large amount of water dripping down and affecting the downstairs residents when watering the flowers. Regarding Liu's claim that Zhou's long-term watering and dripping water caused damage to the walls and floors in his home, because the two homes were three stories apart, they were not direct neighbors, and many neighbors on the upper floor of the high-rise house could cause damage to domestic water, natural rainwater, the quality of the building materials themselves, and Liu also failed to provide evidence to prove that there was a causal relationship between the wall and floor damage in his home and the watering dripping, so he ruled to reject Liu's litigation claim.
Liu appealed, and the second-instance trial upheld the original judgment.
■ Judges speak about the code
In terms of legal nature, this case is an infringement dispute arising from the neighboring relationship, which is a general tortious act, and the principle of attribution of fault liability applies. The constituent elements under the principle of attribution of fault liability include fault, infringement, damage, and causation. The determination of causation is the basis for determining tort liability, and it is also the premise for the court to determine the compensation for tort liability. The causal relationship of infringement refers to the causal relationship between the illegal act and the fact of damage, assuming that there is no such illegal act, the damage will not occur, then the act is the cause of the damage result. Conversely, if the damage occurs even if the act does not exist, the act is not the cause of the damage.
According to the distribution of the burden of proof of "who claims, who proves", Liu, as the plaintiff, claims that Zhou X's infringement acts harm his personal interests, and should bear the burden of proof to prove that there is a causal relationship between the damage to the walls and floors in his home and Zhou X's watering. At present, Liu has not provided evidence to prove the causal relationship between the infringement and the result of the damage, and should bear the adverse consequences, and the court will not support his litigation claim.
In this case, the public security organs dispatched police to investigate the scene and suggested that mutual influence should be avoided by installing pot holders in flower pots. Zhou should adopt it in a timely manner and pay attention to the restraint of his own behavior to avoid unnecessary damage to the residents downstairs. The public security organs' recommendations conform to the principles of economy and green, which can effectively avoid the deterioration of neighborhood relations caused by excessive behavior, and help promote harmonious neighborhood relations.
■ Legal article link
Civil Code of the People's Republic of China
Article 236 Where property rights are obstructed or may be obstructed, the right holder may request the removal of the obstruction or the elimination of the danger.
Article 288 The neighboring rights holder of immovable property shall correctly handle the neighboring relationship in accordance with the principles of favorable production, convenient living, solidarity and mutual assistance, fairness and reasonableness.
Article 1165:Where the perpetrator infringes upon the civil rights and interests of others due to fault and causes harm, he shall bear tort liability.
Where it is presumed that the perpetrator is at fault in accordance with the provisions of the law and cannot prove that he is not at fault, he shall bear tort liability.
Article 1167:Where the infringing act endangers the personal or property safety of others, the infringed party has the right to request the infringer to bear tort liability such as stopping the infringement, removing the obstruction, or eliminating the danger.
Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China
Article 67:Parties have the responsibility to provide evidence for their own claims. Where parties and their agents ad litem are unable to collect evidence on their own due to objective reasons, or evidence that the people's court finds is necessary for trial of the case, the people's court shall investigate and collect it. People's courts shall, in accordance with legally prescribed procedures, comprehensively and objectively review and verify evidence. (□ Zhang Yiqian GuLin)
(People's Court Daily)