| Case Regarding Dispute over Removal of Obstacle (Chen v. A Property Owners' Committee) : New First-Floor Property Owner Requested to Cancel Elevator Installation -- Court: Claims Dismissed as the Decision Made by Owners' Assembly Is Valid and Necessary Convenience Should Be Provided | | 陈某与某业主大会排除妨害纠纷案——一楼新业主要求撤销加装电梯 法院：业主大会决定合法有效 应提供必要便利 驳回诉请 |
| The new property owner didn't know the previous owner had consented to the elevator installation when purchasing the property, and discovered the construction was about to commence only after taking delivery of the property. Will the court support the new property owner's request for cancellation? | | 购买新房时不知原业主已同意加装电梯，拿到新房后才发现项目即将施工，新业主不同意要求撤销，法院会支持吗？ |
| ．．．．．． | | 【案情回放】 |
| | 陈先生购置了一套位于一楼的房子，拿到房后才发现所在楼栋即将加装电梯，该房屋的前业主及该楼的其他业主都已签字同意，并且还曾召开业主大会表决通过，陈先生担心加装电梯会占用部分道路，存在消防隐患，还会影响自家的通风、采光和住宅安宁，于是诉至法院要求撤销加装电梯的决定。 |
| | 【以案说法】 |
| | 新业主诉请撤销加装电梯决定的理由能否成立？ |
| | 上海普陀法院经审理认为，陈先生作为低楼层业主，为了所在楼栋绝大多数业主的利益考虑，应为加装电梯提供必要的便利，并对可能存在的不便之处给予一定程度的容忍。涉案房屋所在楼栋并非高层民用建筑，加装电梯虽然占用部分道路，但有其他道路可满足消防车辆通行，并未影响消防安全，新业主诉请理由不能成立。 |
| | 审理过程中，法院对业主大会加装电梯的决定是否违法法律规定的程序进行了审查，认为业主大会的召开方式及计票方式均符合该小区的议事规则，不存在程序违法的情况，因此加装电梯的决定合法有效。 |
| | 综上，法院判决驳回新业主的诉讼请求。 |
| | ．．．．．． |
Dear visitor,you are attempting to view a subscription-based section of lawinfochina.com. If you are already a subscriber, please login to enjoy access to our databases . If you are not a subscriber, please subscribe . Should you have any questions, please contact us at:
+86 (10) 8268-9699 or +86 (10) 8266-8266 (ext. 153)
Mobile: +86 133-1157-0713
Fax: +86 (10) 8266-8268
database@chinalawinfo.com
| |
您好：您现在要进入的是北大法律英文网会员专区，如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录，进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息；如您还不是我们 的英文用户，请注册并交纳相应费用成为我们的英文会员 。如有问题请来电咨询；
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail: database@chinalawinfo.com
|
| | | |
| | | |