real-estate-madagascar
Real Estate Nosybe
real-estate-madagascar
real-estate-madagascar
real-estate-madagascar

Co-ownership

Co-ownership.

Co-ownership.

Co-ownership

Co-ownership.

The joint owners can freely have the privative and common parts of the building, since they respect the arrangement of the joint ownership’s regulation, the rights of the other co-owners and the destination of the building. The classification of thecommon parts and the privative parts results from the regulation of the joint ownership. In the absence of precision, it is necessary to refer to the law or to submit the ambiguity of the clause of the regulation to the judge.

Rights on the common parts.

Unless the regulation of the joint ownerships does not dispose it differently, a part of the building is common since it has a utility for at least two co-owners. It is essentially a shell of the building (wall, roof…), elements of common equipment (elevator, heating…), common buildings (corridors, staircases…), drains, water and electricities’ networks.

Work on a common part.

A co-owner can not complete works on the common parts (to repaint the stair-well of its floor for example).
It can happen that certain works which he wishes to undertake affects a common part or the appearance of the building (poses shutters, connection with common drains…). In this case, it must obligatorily obtain an authorization of the general meeting. The vote takes place in the majority of article 25 or article 26, if the realization of work requires the common parts’ annexation (see the “the general meeting of co-ownerships” document).

The co- owner who carries out these works without the backing of the property co-owners’ association can be condemned to the restoration of the places, even to the payment of damages, if it results a damage for the co-ownership. The action can be instituted during 10 years.

Failing to be authorized by the assembly, the co-owner can seize the Supreme Court. The judge checks, to authorize works, if they are not against the building’s destination and that they do not transgress the rights of part owners. This legal authorization can relate to only work of improvement. The legal authorization can not be given if works were already executed.

To note: The regulation of co-ownership or an assembly’s decision can grant a co- owner the exclusive pleasure of a common part (terrace, interior courtyard…). He can carry out only small installations there. Since considered works have an influence on the common parts of which he has the pleasure, he must allowed by the assembly of the co-owners (enlarging of the privative part, construction of a veranda…).

The purchase of a common part.

A co-owner who wishes it can buy a common part (a landing or a small room being next to the apartment…). Acquisition must be authorized by the assembly in the majority of article 26 (see the “the general meeting of co-ownership” document).

On a practical level, the operation of purchase implies the creation of a new batch with a share of common part and privative part. The assembly thus decides for the sale and the modification of the burden-sharing to double majority.

Consequently, the regulation of co-ownership must be modified and published at the mortgages’ office by the notary.

Rights on the privative parts.

Are regarded as privative parts the apartments and the other buildings (hollow, garages…). Each     co-owner is in right to have his batch freely. This absolute property right is exercised in the limit of the disposal of the co-ownership regulation (prohibition of an occupation…) and of the neighbors’ respect.

Relations of neighbourhood.

The co-owners must respect the peace of the building and their neighbors (see the “disorders of neighborhoods ‘document). The regulation of co-ownership can comprise certain clauses specific to the building such as, prohibition to park the cars in the common court, to make barbecues on the terraces, to extend the linen to the windows…

The destination of the building.

The co-owner must respect the destination of the building, such as it results from the regulation of co-ownership.

Thus, in a middle-class building, it can be impossible to practice in its apartment a liberal profession. In the event of ambiguity of the clause of the regulation, the co-owner can ask to the judge that the activity under consideration in the aim of the building’s destination be examined. The judge can be referred the case in the 2 months following the meeting of the assembly.

If you like this article, click Like.

Find us on Facebook

home_layout == ‘directory’ ) { ?>

Translate »