E 'that there was no legal prohibition to hold in a condominium pets.
The regulation contains a provision to the contrary is restrictive of property rights and is considered legally void.
MAY UNDER NO 'TO PROHIBIT THE POSSESSION OF A SO-CALLED OF ANIMAL DISEASE (dog or cat), despite regulations covering the prohibition, the Supreme Court has in fact established, a number of judgments (No. 5078 of 30.10 .1979 - No 5769 of 06.12.1978 - No 832 of 5.2.1980, etc..), these regulations are invalid by reason of restricting personal freedom of the individual, that is unconstitutional. MAKE YOU SHOW A COPY OF THE CONDOMINIUM REGULATION first act of the lease or purchase, whether the regulation not yet exist or, if any, places no ban, no one can deprive the company of animals, if the regulation is instead placed the ban in question, this will be binding only when you purchase or lease will be You mentioned the existence of the regulation and whether it will be accepted and signed by you. Only in this case the neighbors can work against you and still must demonstrate that the animal has caused serious disturbance to the neighborhood, the normal behavior of animals, though noisy, is not criminally liable (Article 844 of the Civil Code ).
E ' possible to prohibit the keeping of animals if the house rules established at the time of contract of sale of the building it is explicitly mentioned. The assembly condominium can not prevent the ownership of animals even if unanimous vote. The keeping of animals in a building may be prohibited only if the property owner is contractually bound not to keep animals in the apartment (so some judge has ruled.) In all other cases it is not possible to impose the bans.
public nuisance barking
The disorder may be prolonged if interrupt or prevent the rest of the regular people: the lay art. 659 of the Penal Code and other regulations of city police of individual municipalities. The court may order the removal of the animal which has caused disturbances and harassment inside the building or in the charge in private. The owner can also be applied to an administrative fine by the Municipal Police, against whom he may appeal to the mayor of their town by the dates listed in the police report. In the elevator
The prohibition to use the lift in the company of your pet can be expressed only in a regulation of a contractual nature. If the house rules does not provide anything about it, check with the Ombudsman's own region that there are no laws restricting the freedom to do so citizen. Who is responsible
is the dog owner or person in charge that he is responsible for damage caused to the common areas of condominiums or condo. According to art. 2052 of the Civil Code, carers must answer for misdeeds, even when the animal escaped or is lost. Unless you try the accident, to demonstrate that the damage is not depended on the willingness of the person who keeps or attends. You can take out an insurance policy to cover liability claims for damage caused by the animal.
(from http://animalistinelweb.altervista.org/pagine/cani_in_condominio.html )
why this post?
A cousin of mine wanted to forbid her to keep her Dogue de Bordeaux because they lived in a condominium and apartment buildings said it was prohibited by law.
They went through lawyers and ultimately won her, and condominiums are due to be silent.
you after two months, however, sold the house and went to live in a detached two-family, not just because she liked to live among people who look at you every time you go wrong with the dog, but meanwhile has shown that there no law that prevents you from keeping dogs in the condominium.
0 comments:
Post a Comment