[Typical case] Randry cats and dogs in the home do not pay attention to hygiene, and neighbors do no

Because the neighbors raised multiple stray cats and dogs for a long time, the sanitary conditions in the building deteriorated, and the residents complained to the People's Court of Haidian District, Beijing. After trial, the court found that the behavior of the neighbors had a negative impact on the lives of the residents.

Introduction to the case

The plaintiff Li said that he lived in the same old unit building as Zhang. In recent years, Zhang has continued to bring stray cats and dogs home to raise, and raised more than ten cats and dogs at the same time, far beyond the normal number of pets raised in ordinary families, and because Zhang did not clean up the feces in time, the sanitation in the building was sanitary. Worsening, a lot of mosquito, cockroaches, and fleas, the odor is filled, and the noise disturbs people. The two sides have repeatedly sought solutions, but neither can fundamentally solve the problem. Therefore, it was sued to the court on the grounds that the hindrance dispute was required to move out of pets, clean up pests, maintain hygiene and compensate for mental loss of 12,000 yuan.

During the trial, the defendant Zhang expressed his recognition of some facts. In his home, there were indeed a lot of pets, messy environment, and severe pests, but did not agree with the psychological damage mentioned by the plaintiff.

Li Mou submitted photos of the law enforcement agencies to Zhang's house, corridor environment photos, and professional anti -killing companies to disinfect the corridor. During the trial of this case, the undertaking judge also went to the community where Zhang was located to learn about the relevant situation.

The court's trial believes that Zhang's behavior has obstructed Li's right to use the house's normal residence. Li asked Zhang to move out of a pet dog, remove garbage, eliminate pests, and keep indoor and corridor cleaning requests. Li's claimed mental damage and comfort, because the relevant evidence was not submitted, did not support it. The court finally made the above judgment.

After the verdict, the parties of the two sides were not appealed, and the judgment was now effective.

Judge

Article 240 of the Civil Code stipulates that the owner has the right to possess, use, return, and punishment in accordance with the law. Article 236 stipulates that if the right of property rights or may obstruct property, the right holder may request to eliminate the danger of obstructing or eliminating.

The property right is the right to enjoy direct domination and exclusion to specific things in accordance with the law. According to the above provisions, the rights of real estate or property owners enjoy possession, use, income, and punishment in accordance with the law. For illegal and improper localities, the right holders can request an obstacle to the exercise of property rights.

In addition, Article 288 of the Civil Code stipulates that the neighboring right holders of real estate shall properly handle adjacent relationships in accordance with the principles of favorable production, convenience of life, unity, mutual assistance, and fairness.

The adjacent relationship refers to two or more owners or users adjacent to the real estate. When exercising the ownership or use right of real estate, such as ventilation, lighting, water use, drainage, and passing, etc. Convenience and acceptance of restrictions and obligations. For example, no negative effect on the life of neighbors is one of the restrictions that pets need to receive.

In modern society, people gradually realize that the exercise of the ownership of real estate is not absolute. In order to avoid the owners' demand for social progress and public interests due to exercise of their rights, it is necessary to exercise the ownership, especially the exercise of the motionless product rights to restrict the exercise of the motionless product rights. Essence Based on this law, the laws of various countries pay attention to the necessary restrictions on the exercise of non -moving product rights.

When determining whether it constitutes a hindered property right, the judge will comprehensively consider whether the behavior is necessary or inevitable for daily life, whether it is performed within a reasonable limit, whether it is unreasonable for a long time, and whether the actor has subjective and maliciousness. If the non -malicious behavior occasionally occurs in special situations, it is usually not judged as infringement of property rights.

The judge reminds that the dispute between adjacent relationships is one of the main forms of contradictions between residents. It should be paid attention to carrying out activities within the limit of no negative impact on other residents. Especially during the prevention and control of the new crown epidemic, the home time is extended. Please pay attention when carrying out indoor fitness and other activities. Timely communication and adjustment occurs in contradictions to maintain a harmonious and happy life in the neighborhood.

Source: Supreme People's Court

- END -