property

This is what the Horizontal Property Law says about it

by

“Football is football”, said Serbian midfielder and coach Vujain Boškov. It may be a bit obscure, but the phrase captures well the magnetism of the beautiful sport and its ability to mobilize an entire country. It comes with walking around any city in Spain these days. No matter where you are, north, south, east or west, coast or mountain, chances are you will find red flags hanging from the balconies, a spontaneous way to support the National Team. But… Can they fine you for doing so? Fines for hanging the flag? Exact. If you open Google and search on the topic you will find a good handful of articles that, for weeks, warn that hanging the Spanish flag from your balcony can be expensive. It is even likely that some of those articles have reached you through networks. The formulation changes, but its holders They are categorical and leave the same threat, sanctions of several thousand euros: “The Horizontal Property Law confirms it: hanging the Spanish flag on the balcony during the World Cup can lead to fines for the owners of up to €3,000.” And is that true? Most of these posts refer to the Horizontal Property Law (LPH), the ‘bible’ in everything that refers to coexistence between neighbors in buildings, so the easiest thing is to go directly to it. In the standard we see several articles about what can and cannot be done in homes and common areas, including facades, but there is no direct reference to the placement of a flag. And even less so if it simply hangs from the balcony. To be more precise, in the seventh article (point ‘1’) the LPH says: “The owner of each apartment or premises may modify the architectural elements, facilities or services of that one when it does not undermine or alter the security of the building, its general structure, its configuration or external state, or harm the rights of another owner, and must previously report such works to the person who represents the community. In the rest of the property he/she may not make any alterations.” Does it say anything else? Yes. In the article 9 The LPH also leaves an interesting indication: the owners must “respect the general facilities of the community and other common elements, whether they are for general use or exclusive to any of the owners, whether or not they are included in their apartment or premises, making appropriate use and avoiding at all times causing damage.” The rule reminds us that every owner has a responsibility: “Maintain his own apartment or premises and private facilities in good condition, in terms that do not harm the community or other owners, compensating for any damage caused by his carelessness or people for whom he is responsible.” Does a flag represent an alteration? That’s the key. The owner of a home cannot modify the aesthetics of the façade, but it is questionable whether the simple placement of a flag can be interpreted as such. I admitted it recently the government in damn.es: “In the case of a flag, it can hardly be considered an alteration of the façade because it is not a structural element.” The key is how that flag is displayed. If the homeowner makes a “facade modification”, drilling or installing a rigid and permanent structure, such as a fixed pole that protrudes, there could be a conflict, but the reality is that in the vast majority of cases that circumstance does not occur. People simply hang flags from balconies or windows with zip ties, clips, or other temporary fasteners. In fact, it is not the first time that flags have been hung during a World Cup and most disappear after the tournament. Mystery then? No. Beyond the LPH, there are other regulations that could come into play, such as municipal ordinances or community bylaws. Let’s start with the latter. Communities can provide themselves with internal rules that regulate coexistence and what can be done within a property, but these guidelines are by no means omnipotent. Guillermo Cerdeira, professor of Civil Law, explains for example to Newtral that a neighborhood agreement prohibiting the installation of flags would likely be “illegal.” In any case, if there is a conflict with the community of owners, that does not have to result in fines either. If there is a disparity in criteria as to whether or not it alters the aesthetics of the façade, it would go to trial and, at worstthe neighbor who installed the flag would have to remove it, pay for the necessary repairs to the façade (if any) and face legal costs. What about local ordinances? It is the other factor in the equation. Especially because not all properties are the same. Regardless of what the LPH or the community statutes say, a newly built building in a modern residential neighborhood is not in exactly the same situation as an old property located in a historic center with heritage protection. In the latter case, modifying a façade can lead to sanctions of several thousand euros. That is in fact the reference taken by the articles that talk about sanctions, not the LPH. In any case the focus of the problem would be the same: the structural modification of the façade. So much damn.es as Newtral They have spoken with several city councils to find out if they have specific ordinances that regulate this issue (including Madrid and Barcelona) and the answer is the same: no. What do they say exactly? “As long as it does not involve a fixed installation or an alteration of the façade, it does not generally constitute a municipal administrative infraction,” Barcelona clarifies. “Any conflict related to the use of common elements of the building corresponds to the private sphere.” This is not the first time that Spanish town councils have been forced to talk about the issue. It happened last October, coinciding with Hispanidad, when a hoax circulated that there was fined 600 euros hang the … Read more

Whether or not the Horizontal Property Law allows defaulters to enjoy the pool

by

Friday in mid-July. Any city in Spain. Five in the afternoon. The thermometer around 35ºC and there is no way to cool off at home, so you decide to put on your swimsuit, throw a towel over your shoulder and go down to the community pool, where some neighbors have been soaking for hours. Everything is going great until suddenly your expression goes wrong. To you and the rest of those present. The first defaulter who has not paid his installments for several months has just crossed the fence. Can it be there? Do you have the right to enjoy the pool despite your debt? Of swimming pools and defaulters. In 2015, the General Council of Associations of Property Administrators surveyed the financial health of the communities of property owners in Spain and found that a percentage more than respectable (42.8%) had at least one neighbor who was not up to date with their payments. Since then it is very likely that the ‘picture’ has changed, but that does not mean that the communities have been freed from the scourge of non-payments. weigh all the resources that neighborhood associations have to combat them, there are still people who do not meet their quotas. And that in summer leaves a thorny question: Can the rest of the owners veto access to the pool for those defaulters? It is not a minor issue. A Google search arrives to verify that it is a doubt that arises frequently in agencies. The ‘bible’ of the communities. When it comes to housing blocks and neighborhood coexistence, there is a ‘bible’ of reference: the Horizontal Property Law (LPH). It contains rights, duties and, in general, the legislative framework to which neighborhood communities must adhere. Also in cases of non-payment. In fact, the standard dedicates an entire section (article 21) to defining the “preventive measures” that property owners can apply to deal with defaulters. “The owners’ meeting may agree on dissuasive measures against late payment for the time in which said situation remains, such as the establishment of interests higher than the legal interest or the temporary deprivation of the use of services or facilities, provided that they cannot be considered abusive or disproportionate or that affect the habitability of the properties,” states the first point of article 21 of the LPH. “These measures may in no case be retroactive and may be included in the statutes.” Doesn’t it say anything about swimming pools? Not specifically. Just as it does not do so with other community facilities that exist in some buildings, such as gyms or tennis and paddle tennis courts. However, in that article the LPH slips a few key ideas. The main one is that it recognizes that neighboring communities can adopt certain “deterrent measures.” The second, that these do not have carte blanche. There are certain limitations that should never be skipped. To begin with, the LPH always talks about “agreements”, not improvised prohibitions. It may seem like an unimportant detail, but it is not. It is not enough for the administrator, president or any other neighbor to decide to punish a defaulter for not being up to date with his payments. Any “deterrent measure” must have the support of the homeowners’ association. The LPH even slips the possibility of addressing the issue directly in the statutes and rules of coexistence. “Abusive and disproportionate”. The law adds another important nuance. The board can vote on “deterrent measures,” true; but these have red lines. They cannot be extended beyond the duration of the debt and must not make the defaulter’s stay in the building unviable, something that could happen if the board insists on prohibiting the use of elevators, stairs and landings. The Horizontal Property Law is very clear in this regard, it explicitly speaks of “temporary deprivation of the use of services or facilities, provided that they cannot be considered abusive or disproportionate or that they affect habitability.” Does that affect swimming pools? Good question. Difficult answer. Can it be considered “disproportionate” to prevent a neighbor who is not up to date with spills from taking a dip? In general, managers recognize that vetoing common areas is “a controversial issue”. In fact, the photo can change from one case to another, depending on whether or not the matter is regulated in the statutes. “If it is not provided for in the statutes, the case must always be studied individually. The deprivation of rights must be interpreted restrictively and the aforementioned LPH only indicates two sanctions for defaulters: deprivation of the vote and the possibility of challenge,” slide from a consultancy in Castellón, which also reminds us how difficult it is to translate such a veto into practice. Who and how can prevent a neighbor from getting into the pool? Are the rest of the owners going to do it? Do you have power a watchman to do something like that? Reviewing the jurisprudence. Although not all judicial pronouncements point in exactly the same direction, there are rulings that support communities in favor of vetoing swimming pools for defaulters. The most cited case is a failure published by the Provincial Court of Valencia in May 2016, which concludes that depriving the temporary enjoyment of “an element of a temporary nature”, such as the sports facilities of the property, “cannot be understood as an agreement contrary to the Law or the statutes, but as an agreement that remains within the scope of the internal regime rules.” Images | Nick Page (Unsplash) and Brandon Hoogenboom (Unsplash) In Xataka | This summer you might find someone shitting in the pool. It has already happened in 300 Spanish swimming pools

“If your cat licks you, he is telling you that you are his property.”

by

It doesn’t matter if you are more of a dog person or if you prefer cats. We can all agree that the image of a cat licking its paws or licking its human friends is adorable. The problem is that it is a scene as adorable as it is disconcerting. Traditionally we think that if our cat licks us, it is telling us that it loves us. However, according to experts, there may be many other reasons. And none of them are precisely related to love. It tolerates you, tastes you or possesses you. As explained by Dr. David Sands, an expert in animal psychology, in an article for Science Focusit is not known for sure why cats lick humans. However, there are three quite plausible hypotheses. They may even all be true. The first indicates that the cat indicates to the human that it does not perceive it as a threat. On the other hand, the second hypothesis opts for a chemical analysis of the human. Cats’ taste buds are powerful. More or less. Finally, it may be that if your cat licks you, he is basically marking you as property. For them we are just another animal. Cats learn to behave with humans as they do with other animals. Since they are puppies, they conceive the act of licking as a sign of trust. The first relationship they have with this gesture is through their mothers, who groom them with their tongues when they are puppies. This, logically, is a boost of confidence. Therefore, over time, they get used to doing the same with other animals they trust. If another cat is not a threat to them, they show it by licking. With humans, they do exactly the same. In a way, they indicate that they tolerate that person, not necessarily that they adore them. Chemistry based on licks. Cats don’t actually have a super powerful sense of taste. They have only a few hundred taste buds. Humans have 9,000so that we get an idea of ​​how insensitive cats are in that sense. However, they do have a great sense of smell, which they are very guided by. analyze the world around them. They often complement this sense of smell with that of taste, so that the tongue can be considered a kind of antenna with which they extract the first signals. These signals can indicate the presence of substances that give them information about the human in question, such as pheromones, perfumes or food remains. You are his property. Cats give a lot of importance to their smell. In fact, as Sands also explains, if you’ve ever seen your cat lick itself after you pet himhe’s basically getting rid of your smell. But they don’t just do that. They also try to make what they own smell like them. It is a way of marking territory. on your cheeks They have glands with which they can impregnate everything from objects to animals through the act of licking. In a way, they scrape off your own scent and impregnate you with theirs. Therefore, in reality, several of Dr. Sands’ hypotheses can complement each other. Your cat licks you to show you that it is not afraid of you and, by the way, since it does not see you as a threat, it decides to mark you as its property. If you are not going to cause him problems and you usually bring him food, you are a good possession. Does this mean your cat only wants you for convenience? Well it depends, each cat is different. What is clear is that, in general, the licking gesture is not an act of love. They may love us in other ways, but let’s not fool ourselves with that either. Image | Magnificent Xataka | In Alicante, the Animal Welfare Law has put associations on a war footing over an issue: feline colonies

Antimatter has a property that has taken physicists decades to measure. CERN just did it a hundred times better than anyone else

by

Antimatter is fascinating not only because of its essence; It is also due to the still enigmatic role he played in the origin of the universe. Scientists still do not have the necessary tools to understand with any precision the role of this form of matter in the formation of the cosmos and the mechanisms that govern the tenuous line that delimits the imbalance between matter and antimatter. Fortunately, what they do know are its constituent elements and some of its properties. Understand what is antimatter It’s not difficult. And we can observe it as an exotic type of matter that is made up of antiparticles, which are particles with the same mass and spin as the particles we are familiar with, but with the opposite electrical charge. In this way the antiparticle of the electron is the positron or antielectron. And the antiparticle of the proton is the antiproton. Antimatter has a surprising property: when it comes into direct contact with matter, both annihilate, releasing a large amount of energy in the form of high-energy photons, as well as other possible particle-antiparticle pairs. It is currently being studied in many of the most important research centers specialized in particle physics in the world with the hope that knowing it better will help us understand some of the mysteries of the cosmos that remain out of our reach. The hyperfine cleavage of antihydrogen has been revealed CERN’s antimatter factory produces this form of matter by firing high-energy protons from an adjacent synchrotron at a metal block. This process generates a cascade of secondary particles, and among them antiprotons arise. These latter particles can then be cooled to be used in the facility’s experiments. ALPHA (Antihydrogen Laser Physics Apparatus or antihydrogen laser physics apparatus), which is one of them, is specialized in producing antihydrogen by fusing antiprotons with positrons. Researchers then use magnetic fields to trap the antihydrogen for further study. An antihydrogen atom is composed of an antiproton in its nucleus and a positron orbiting around it, in the same way that a hydrogen atom contains a proton around which an electron orbits. Deuterium and tritium, the two isotopes of hydrogen, also have one or two neutrons in the nucleus respectively. The researchers of the ALPHA experiment have achieved something amazing: have measured hyperfine division of the ground state of the antihydrogen atom with a precision of 4 parts per million, improving the previous result by two orders of magnitude. This milestone is very important because it allows very rigorous tests to be carried out in the field of quantum electrodynamics. Hyperfine splitting of the ground state of the antihydrogen atom is the small splitting of the lowest energy state of the atom due to the magnetic interaction between the antiproton and the positron. According to the fundamental symmetries of nature, this measurement should be identical to the equivalent effect observed in hydrogen. Be that as it may, this milestone is very important because it allows very rigorous tests to be carried out in the field of quantum electrodynamics, which is the most precise theory that explains the interactions that occur between charged particles and light. Jeffrey Hangst, the spokesperson for the ALPHA experiment, explains that “the hyperfine splitting of the ground state of hydrogen is the origin of the so-called 21 centimeter lineso prized by radio astronomers and researchers searching for extraterrestrial intelligence (…) When the antimatter factory was conceived in the 1990s, the hyperfine splitting of antihydrogen was one of the key measurement objectives justifying the construction of the facility.” “The current measurement represents the culmination of many years of effort,” Hangst pointed out. “We have pursued the precise determination of the hyperfine splitting of antihydrogen since we demonstrated how to trap antimatter atoms in 2010. And now another group in the antimatter factory, the ASACUSA collaboration, is also trying to study this very important transition. Their technique, if demonstrated, has the potential to achieve even greater precision.” Thanks to ALPHA’s high level of precision, the measurement of hyperfine cleavage is sensitive to the effects of the internal structure of the antiproton at the center of the antihydrogen atom. In any case, this result is a very important step in the effort to further explore the nature of antimatter. Image | CERN More information | CERN In Xataka | European science gets serious: EUROfusion and CERN will work together on nuclear fusion and new colliders

What the Horizontal Property Law says and does not say about fans: when their use becomes a problem

by

With summer just around the corner and part of the country fooling around with the 30thmore and more homes in Spain are surrendering to the ‘pre-summer’ ritual: the fans are installed, the air conditioners are checked and the compulsive search for tips to make the torrid afternoons begins. more bearable at home. Against that backdrop, there is a question that in recent weeks has been circulating on the Internet: What does the law say about ventilators? If my neighbor uses a noisy one, can I have him change it? What if it is my device that causes discomfort? As is usually the case when we talk about housing blocks, the most advisable thing is to resort to the ‘bible’ of neighborhood coexistence, the Horizontal Property Law. What has happened? If you go to Google and search for information about fans and laws, you will come across a few recent articles that, more or less emphatically, warn of “complaints”, “dislikes” or even “sanctions” due to improper use of these appliances. All supposedly based on the Horizontal Property Law (LPH). The reality is somewhat more complicated. It is true that the LPH establishes a regulatory framework that can be applied in cases where the use of a fan causes obvious discomfort, but it is equally true that the LPH does not specifically talk about fans (in fact the guidelines it establishes are very general) and the general ‘picture’ must be completed with other regulations, such as Noise Law or local ordinances. What does the LPH say? The article that interests us most here is the seventh. To be more precise, your section two. In it, the Horizontal Property Law clarifies: “The owner and occupant of the apartment or premises are not allowed to carry out activities in it or in the rest of the property that are prohibited in the statutes, that are harmful to the property or that contravene the general provisions on annoying, unhealthy, harmful, dangerous or illicit activities.” The pattern is quite general, but as they explain from the Uncibay Abogados office, a persistent, intense noise, perceptible from the rest of the homes and repeated at odd hours could be considered an “annoying activity” and, therefore, be affected by the article 7.2 of the LPH. As for its source, it can be caused by a party, a dog that doesn’t stop barking at night, a neighbor determined to move furniture at dawn… or an old appliance, such as a fan that vibrates and squeaks. What to do in those cases? In general, the LPH explains to us that when “annoying, unhealthy, harmful, dangerous or illegal activities” occur, it is normal for the president of the community to speak with the problematic neighbor to correct them. The first thing, therefore, is dialogue. If that does not work and the nuisance continues, the homeowners’ meeting must meet and approve more severe measures, such as taking the issue to court. After this procedure, the judge can order “as a precautionary measure” the cessation of the annoying activities. And that would be just the first step. “If the sentence is upheld, it may provide, in addition to the definitive transfer of the prohibited activity and the compensation for damages that may be appropriate, the deprivation of the right to use the home or premises for a period not exceeding three years, depending on the seriousness of the infraction and the damages caused,” clarify the LPH. “If the offender is not the owner, the sentence may declare all rights relating to the home or premises extinguished, as well as its immediate release.” {“videoId”:”x7znesx”,”autoplay”:false,”title”:”Self-consumption building THIS IS HOW THEY WORK – Solar panels in apartment blocks”, “tag”:”solar”, “duration”:”564″} Are there more rules? Yes, there is more legislation that should be taken into account. For example the Law of Noise (37/2003), the Civil code and local ordinances. The one in Madrid, for example, addresses the issue in its article 46: “The owners or users of radio receivers, television, music equipment, household appliances, air conditioning devices or instruments and, in general, any domestic sound source, must install them and adjust their use, so that they comply with the limitations of this ordinance, in order not to disturb good coexistence.” The same standard details the “sound level limits” and “noise indices” that must be applied in spaces with healthcare, residential, hospitality or educational use, among others. In general, within a home the limit is usually set at 35 decibels during daylight hours, roughly the equivalent of a quiet conversation between two people. If we talk about nights, that barrier extends to 30 dB. If we want to apply it to the use of fans, the conclusion is clear: the law establishes a framework, but it only applies when the device causes obvious and demonstrable discomfort. Images | Nameofmin (Unsplash) and Jason Anderson (Unsplash) In Xataka | If there are elderly people in your building, an elevator can be installed without the board’s approval. The key: the Horizontal Property Law (function() { window._JS_MODULES = window._JS_MODULES || {}; var headElement = document.getElementsByTagName(‘head’)(0); if (_JS_MODULES.instagram) { var instagramScript = document.createElement(‘script’); instagramScript.src=”https://platform.instagram.com/en_US/embeds.js”; instagramScript.async = true; instagramScript.defer = true; headElement.appendChild(instagramScript); – The news What the Horizontal Property Law says and does not say about fans: when their use becomes a problem was originally published in Xataka by Carlos Prego .

Seedance 2.0 has used Hollywood intellectual property to go viral. Hollywood has used the courts

by

ByteDance is not only the company responsible for TikTok: This is a conglomerate that is pushing the development of artificial intelligence in China. And a few weeks ago they presented a Video generation AI which was the most brutal thing we had seen: Seedance 2.0. He perfectly matched any animated character, but also to flesh and blood actors. The West was quick to react, raising its voice and arguing “what happens to my copyrights.” And, in the background, there is something more important: one more chapter in the technological power struggle between China and the rest of the world. In short. Seedance 2.0 is a multimodal AI that allows us to generate video from text, images and other video chips. With a single promptAI takes care of the rest, combining video, audio and visual effects that can be extremely realistic. During the days following the announcement we were able to see a multitude of examples that showed a level of “perfection” not previously seen in other video models. “China is coming”. And the problem is what you are imagining: to recreate a photorealistic Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise, he has evidently been inspired by those in the flesh. Also in the Douyin’s inexhaustible librarythe Chinese TikTok, which allowed him a complex understanding of facial and physical expressions and lighting calculations in a multitude of situations. My colleague Lacort already said it: This is not “China is coming”, but rather “China already does this… and we don’t”. Hollywood picks up the phone. And of course, just like the Japanese industry did when OpenAI blatantly copied his works so that we could create our Ghibli-style dog in ChatGPT, the American film industry was quick to raise its voice. One of the first was Disney, which in the purest Nintendo stylesent a cease and desist letter to ByteDance, accusing the Chinese company to use Disney characters to train your model. Disney is bothered by this threat, but it bothers it more that it doesn’t get a cut like it does from its alliance with OpenAI. Days later it was Motion Picture Association (to which Netflix, Amazon Prime, MGM, Paramount, Sony, Universal, Warner or Disney belong) which sent the same letter of interruption of operations to the Chinese company, accusing it of using its characters and protected material to train the model. And it has had consequences. Putting on the brake. In China, Seedance 2.0 remains operational, where it has achieved a high degree of virality among users, but where it also serves as a tool for creators. ByteDance planned to open global access in mid-March, but due to threats from the Western film industry, have put those fallow plans. “We are taking steps to strengthen current safeguards as we work to prevent unauthorized use of intellectual property and likeness by users” – ByteDance’s response Disney has surely seen this video: Geopolitical pulse. It is not known how or when Seedance 2.0 will be launched outside of China, but in the background there is something very interesting: the use of copyright as a weapon in the technological war. If this has already gone from “the wolf is coming” to “the wolf is already here”, the West is using its available weapons to stop the advance. We have been following the technological and trade war between the United States for years (dragging Europe) and China, and if this movement implies another movement in the current geopolitical game in which the two poles are developing their AI by leaps and bounds. And China is achieving it without having the same resources at hand as the US AI Big Tech. Seedance is estimated to have been built without NVIDIA H100 chips banned for China, some that its rivals do have. Precedents. Is something similar to what happened with DeepSeek in LLMs And now it’s happening with synthetic video: the US has tried hard to leave China out of the conversation, but they are managing to have a strong presence in it. Another example is the reverse engineer ASML machines o what SMIC and Huawei are making progress in building cutting-edge chips. Capacity vs regulation. And another important theme of the ‘Seedance case’ is that it has become an example of the head-on collision between the technical capacity of AI and the regulatory power of the industry. It’s funny that when it became known that the American AI had ‘borrowed’ the entire Internet to train their models, other industries would be more lukewarm than when a Chinese company does it. And at the center of it all is a European Union that is expressing its intention to bring some sanity to progress for the sake of progress, overriding copyrights that can be trampled depending on who does it. In a proposal to “protect creative work with copyright in the age of AI, the European Parliament requires a series of measures so that companies pay for the resources they need for technology training. According to these companies, such a measure would go against progress and smaller AI companies. It would be curious if ByteDance responded to Disney with that same argument. In Xataka | All the big AIs have ignored copyright laws. The amazing thing is that there are still no consequences

the Horizontal Property Law

by

Unknowns may loom on Spain’s horizon, but one thing is certain: the country is aging. Yeah the latest projections of the INE are spot on. By mid-century, almost a third of the population (30.5%) will have blown out all 65 candles. The problem is that many of our buildings are not prepared to accommodate older people due to their architectural barriers or accessibility deficiencies. Thus, an interesting question remains: What happens if at a given moment a neighbor in a block demands a ramp or an elevator to get to their home? The Horizontal Property Law is clear about it. What has happened? That on Spain’s horizon there is a ticking time bomb that will affect thousands of buildings in the country. The reason: although Spanish society it’s getting older (something that happens in many other nations, inside and outside Europe) a good part of its residential park is not prepared to accommodate people with mobility problems. The challenge is best understood when reviewing two recent studies: the demographic forecasts of the INE and the report on “accessible mobility” launched in 2024 by Ilunion and Otis. And what do they say? The first (INE) reveals that in a matter of a few decades the percentage of septuagenarians, octogenarians and nonagenarians will grow considerably. Yes right now 20.4% of Spaniards are 65 or older, in 2055 that footprint will have expanded to around 30.5%. The second (the report of Ilunion) warns that 34.3% of the main homes (6.45 million) are located in buildings without easy access, in the opinion of their residents. In fact, only 20.8% are prepared for the aging of their tenants. It is not surprising if we take into account that in our country there are five million people who live in buildings of three or more heights that lack an elevator, so they have no choice but to go up and down stairs every time they want to go outside. That’s what I suggested at least. an analysis published two years ago by elDiario.es and which is based on microdata from the Survey of Essential Population and Housing Characteristics, a poll of the INE. What if someone asks for an elevator? That is the question that hovers over many communities of neighbors in Spain and They responded recently our colleagues from Decoesfera. What happens if suddenly an owner proposes installing a ramp or an elevator in the building, a structure that guarantees accessibility to all homes? Do you need board approval? And if the work is carried out, are all residents obliged to bear its cost, including those who live on the ground floor and will not use the elevator? Are there any circumstances in which an owner can require infrastructure that guarantees accessibility? As is usual in building issues, the answer is in the legal “bible” of neighborhood coexistence: the Horizontal Property Law (LPH). More specifically in article 10. What does the law say? That if the request comes from owners with reduced mobility or of advanced age (those who a priori have more difficulties getting around) the works must be carried out no matter what. Without the need for prior agreement from the Board of Owners, although there is advice that advise that the issue be addressed in meetings to seek agreements. Especially due to the cost that usually involves installing ramps, elevators or stair lifts. In your article 10.1 The LPH clarifies that “the “works necessary to guarantee reasonable adjustments in terms of universal accessibility and, in any case, those required at the request of the owners in whose home or premises in whose home or premises people with disabilities or people over 70 live, work or provide voluntary services” will be mandatory and will not require prior agreement from the board. And in case there are any doubts, the law emphasizes that the objective is to ensure their mobility, which may involve the installation of ramps or elevators. Does it say anything about costs? Yes. Although the LPH makes it clear The right of elderly and disabled owners to demand ramps and elevators also establishes certain limits as far as costs are concerned: neighbors must contribute “provided that the amount passed on annually from them, once subsidies or public aid has been deducted, does not exceed 12 ordinary monthly payments of common expenses.” From Alapont clarify that the rule refers to the fixed contributions that each neighbor contributes to help with ordinary expenses. What if there are subsidies? If the cost of the work exceeds these 12 ordinary monthly payments, the difference must be paid by the owners interested in having the elevator or ramp installed. The LPH adds that in any case the rest of the neighbors will have to assume their part of the spill. “It will also be mandatory to carry out these works when the public aid to which the community can have access reaches 75% of the amount thereof,” precise. The key is that the law does not talk about works related to the aesthetics of the property, but about something much more basic: universal accessibility, that all its residents can enter and exit, free of barriers. When the elevator is claimed by a neighbor who does not meet the requirements set out in the LPH (under 70 years of age and without functional diversity), the proposal must receive the endorsement of a simple majority in the board. If the measure goes ahead and receives the green light, all neighbors must participate, Alapont clarifiesincluding those who reside on the ground floor. Images | Diego Marín (Unsplash) and Elio E. López Vega (Unsplash) Via | Decosphere In Xataka | Spain is filling up with buildings with pets. The Horizontal Property Law clarifies what to do when they cause nuisance

Spain is filling up with buildings with pets. The Horizontal Property Law clarifies what to do when they cause nuisance

by

It comes with going outside to check it out. Spain is increasingly a country of dogs and cats than of babies. Literally. about a year ago The World did the math and it turned out that there are 1.8 million children under four years old for 10.5 million pets, which leaves a ratio of almost six animals per infant. This is perceived in the economy, society, cities… and of course the neighborhood communities, where it is not strange that a question arises: ¿What the law says about pets living in apartment blocks? In case of discomfort, noise, dirt… What does the regulations provide? Are there so many pets? Yes. Although it is not easy to compile accurate statistics on pets, there are two sources that help us get a precise idea of ​​the extent to which we have opened our homes to dogs, cats, reptiles, rodents, fish, birds and other fauna. The first is the REIACwhose census is based on microchipped pets. At least in 2023 it added 9.2 million dogs and 1.2 million cats. If we base ourselves on Anfaac, the association of feed manufacturers, your latest data They speak of 6.9 million dogs, 4.9 million cats, five million fish, 3.2 birds, 740,000 reptiles and 548,000 small mammals, which raises the general count of pets above the 20 million of animals. The big question, especially when we talk about pets of a certain size, that run around and must go outside several times a day, as is the case with dogs, is… What happens when they cause disturbances inside a building? When it comes to communities of owners, the reference standard is the Horizontal Property Law (LPH), a law that does not address the issue directly, but does establish a valuable framework, especially in its articles 7.2 and 9.1, which recall the coexistence guidelines that neighbors must respect. Article 7.2 of the LPH: “The owner and occupant of the apartment or premises are not allowed to carry out activities in it or in the rest of the property that are prohibited in the statuses, that are harmful to the property or that contravene the general provisions on annoying, unhealthy, harmful, dangerous or illicit activities”. Article 9 of the LPH: “The obligations of each owner are: to respect the general facilities of the community and other common elements, whether they are for general or private use of any of the owners, whether or not they are included in their apartment or premises, making appropriate use of them and preventing damage or damage from being caused”. The regulations themselves also remind us that, in the event that a neighbor is carrying out annoying activities (which in this case can be transferred to your pet), the community president should ask you to correct them. If that does not happen and the problem persists, the case may end up being taken to court. Although the LPH is a key tool, other standards come into play in this case. The reason is simple. When we talk about pets and neighborhood communities, two different planes overlap. On the one hand, there is the right that everyone has to enjoy their home freely. On the other hand, there is the necessary coexistence between apartments and the shared enjoyment of community areas. The first thing, the enjoyment of the home, is regulated the Constitutionwhich among other issues protects its “inviolability” and private property. Regarding the second, coexistence within the building, it is normal that it is regulated by the statuses of the community. And although this document cannot prohibit owners to have pets at home (a different thing is the tenants and what appears in their rental contracts), the internal rules of a block can establish certain limits when using collective spaces, such as elevators, gardens or swimming pools. Therefore, it is advisable to consult what the statutes say about pets. For example, they may prohibit dogs from being walked off-leash in the building. What there is no doubt about is that if the animal causes any damage, the owner is responsible. It is clearly established by the Civil Code in his article 1905in which he remembers who should assume the responsibility (and costs) if a dog, cat or other animal causes damage outside your home. Article 1905 of the Civil Code: “The owner of an animal, or the one who uses it, is responsible for the damage it causes, even if it escapes or is lost. This responsibility will only cease in the event that the damage came from force majeure or the fault of the person who suffered it.”. The Animal Welfare Law also sets guidelines related to the care of pets at home, which in turn influences the conditions in which they must live, both in houses and in apartments within buildings. For a start (article 27.i) No pet can be left unsupervised for more than three days in a row, a period that is reduced to 24 consecutive hours if we are talking about dogs. The rule also prohibits dogs and cats from living permanently on terraces or balconies, which is considered a “serious infringement”. Image | Eri Gonzales (Unsplash) In Xataka | The Horizontal Property Law is quite clear about one of the most conflictive phenomena of winter: Christmas

Every Christmas there are people who fill their balconies with lights and decorations. The Horizontal Property Law has something to say

by

It happens December after December. As the holidays approach, there are balconies, windows and facades that are invaded by a mixture of led lights, garlands, papanoels Various Christmas-themed pendants and ornaments. Where before there was a simple and nondescript terrace, suddenly there is a confusing mass of colors, lights and shapes that leaves bouncing a tricky question: Do apartment owners have the right to turn their balconies into small theme parks? To answer it you have to go to the LPH. Lights, give me (many) lights. The one from Vigo may be the best known casebut there are many cities in Spain that in recent years have begun to fill their streets with thousands (or even millions) of Christmas lights, far surpassing the decorations that could be seen a decade ago. In the Galician city they boast this year of having nearly 12 million of LEDs spread across 460 neighborhoods, in Madrid they talk about 13 millionin Alcalá de almost fivein the busiest areas of Malaga they will shine 2.7 million…And so on a long list of cities that every Christmas put on a peculiar suit of lights. And what happens in the buildings? The City Councils are not the only ones that get carried away by this lighting fury. Every year there are people who transfer this display of lights and decorations to their own homes, both inside their homes, with Christmas trees, nativity scenes or garlands, and to balconies and facades. It comes with taking a walk through most cities to see people who, when December arrives, fill their terraces with colored LEDs or even decorations that stick out from the balcony. The catalog is extensive: papanoels pendants, decorations of wise men climbing stairs or garlands that fall from the façade. Can they do it? A quick Google search shows that that question reborn each Decembercoinciding with the dates on which people decorate their homes. Can the rest of the neighbors forbid me from giving free rein to my passion for Christmas decorations? Are there limits when we talk about decorating balconies? If I want to decorate a common area of ​​the building, do I need permission from my neighbors? These are questions frequently enough that platforms specialized in both law and the real estate market have devoted attention to them over the last few years. Two clear cases are Legalites and Photohouse. The best: communication. These may seem like far-fetched questions, but we must take into account a fundamental fact: the balconies, facades and roofs of a building do not have the same condition as the living room or kitchen of a home. Terraces, for example, are usually spaces for private use: they are enjoyed exclusively by the owner of the apartment, but in reality they are common elements, so the owner cannot do whatever he wants with them. Without going any further, before carrying out a work, what recommend agencies like Reale is to consult with the board. The same logic can be transferred to Christmas decorations if what we have in mind is to make a huge display of lights or decorate the facade. The first thing is to confirm if the community statutes regulate the exterior aesthetics of the building. As they remember in LegálitasIf we want to install decoration that invades the sidewalk, public spaces or street furniture, it is also advisable to consult the City Council first. After all, the private use of these spaces may require a permit or even entail the payment of a fee. LPH Word. When we talk about communities and coexistence, there is a reference standard that is always good to keep in mind: the Horizontal Property Law (LPH). The text does not specifically talk about LED lights, Christmas trees or papanoels pendants, but gives some guidelines that are applicable in these cases. One of its clearest articles on the matter is the seventh, which clarifies what exactly the owner of an apartment or premises can and (cannot) do: “You may modify the architectural elements, facilities or services of the building when it does not undermine or alter the safety of the building, its general structure, the external configuration or state, or harm the rights of other owners, and must report such works to whoever represents the community.” “The owner and occupant of the apartment or premises are not allowed to carry out activities in it or in the rest of the property that are prohibited in the statutes, that are harmful to the property or that contravene the general provisions on annoying, unhealthy, harmful, dangerous or illicit activities,” adds the LPH in the same article. In case there were any doubts, the norm (citing in turn the Civil code) remember that there are elements subject to a “co-ownership” regime. Why is it important? Because although the wording of the LPH may be generic and does not explicitly talk about Christmas decorations, it touches on the key points that can generate conflict between the different neighbors of a block. To be more precise, it emphasizes that no owner can “undermine” the “external configuration and state” of the property or “harm” the rest of the tenants. So, if we decide to turn our balconies into small tributes to Christmas, we will have to ask ourselves a series of questions first: Do the decorations hang or stick out enough to affect the “exterior configuration” of the property? Is the installation of outlets, wiring and lights safe? If they are very close to another neighbor’s window, can we cause inconvenience? “Out of prudence”. The most advisable thing is therefore to keep all these issues in mind and above all to be aware of the internal rules of each community. Also communicate with those responsible. So advises it in elDiario.es Patricia Briones, from the College of Property Administrators of Madrid (CAFMadrid). “Any neighbor who wishes to install decorative elements in a common space on a private basis must, out of prudence and to avoid conflicts, request authorization from the board,” … Read more

We Spaniards have been calling all donuts with holes “donut” all our lives. Now it is private property of Bimbo

by

Cases of all types and types pass through the Supreme Court table. That’s nothing new. What is curious is that its magistrates rule on a lawsuit in which pastries, linguistics and brands are combined, all well mixed in a legal dispute so full of chiaroscuro that justice has taken a while almost a decade in reaching a conclusion. As if that were not striking in itself, at the center of the dispute was one of the most famous sweets in the country: Donut. We explain ourselves. Word of the RAE. If you open the RAE online dictionary and type “donut” you will see that the meaning From the word is clear, at least to academics: a donut is basically a “spongy, donut-shaped piece of pastry, fried and usually glazed or covered in chocolate.” A type of donut. The RAE also clarifies that the term comes from the registered trademark Donut. The million dollar question is… Is donut (like that, in lower case and with an accent) the same as Donut? Does the fact that the first word has been in the Royal Academy’s dictionary for years allow any Spanish company to use it freely or is it the exclusive property of the company that popularized it, Bakery Donuts (Bimbo), owner for decades of the DONUT brand and others that have included the term? Almost a decade of lawsuits. The above questions are more than just questions thrown into the air or theoretical reflections. They are at the bottom of a dispute that may date back to beginning of 2017when a long legal tug-of-war began centered on the word “doughnut.” Around that time, Bimbo Donuts Iberia filed a lawsuit before the Commercial Court No. 9 of Madrid when it detected that another third-party company (Atlanta Restauración Tematica) was offering donuts on its website that, although they were called Redondoughts, were described as “doughnuts.” For Bimbo, this represented a violation of its trademark and it decided to sue. Why’s that? The Confidential has had access to the last ruling in the case, which allows us to understand the arguments put forward by both parties. For Bimbo, the fact that another company used the term represented two things: first, a use of its brand, which has been cared for for decades; second, an example of unfair competition that affects their interests in the candy market. For Atlanta things are different. In your opinion“donut” is nothing more than a word in common use, a word recognized by the Royal Academy. As if that were not enough, he claims that he has not even used it “as a trademark”, but rather on his website, where at the time it had an “insignificant” reach. In fact, the company is dedicated to selling to professionals in what is known as ‘Horeca’ channela label that basically refers to establishments such as hotels, restaurants and cafes. To the Supreme. Bimbo’s claims were unsuccessful in the first instance. Not in second either. As remember Five Days, This last court even recognized that the word donut is descriptive, in common use and appears in the RAE dictionary. The multinational did not give up and the issue ended up in the Supreme Court, which is the one that has had the last word. The most curious thing is that for its magistrates the reality is somewhat different than for previous judges. “It cannot be ignored that the use of the same word by Atlanta may imply per se an improper use of the reputation or notoriety of the Donut brands, with the consequent impairment of their distinctive character and reputation,” reasons the ruling of the Supreme Court, which even speaks of the risk of “loss of prestige.” “The third party unfairly benefits from the attractive power of the brand.” In case there were any doubts, the ruling recalls that Atlanta did not exactly use the term RAE (with a lowercase letter and an accent), which leads the court to point out that the company did not act in a “loyal” manner towards the “legitimate interests” of Bakery. “It affected its renown, distinctive character and exclusivity,” he remarks. An armored brand. The conclusion? Whatever the RAE says, the unauthorized use of the word ‘Donut’ for commercial purposes (at least in Spain) violates the rights brand of Grupo Bimbo. Hence the multinational spoke of a “historic legal victory.” In his opinion, the ruling recognizes “the renown” of his brand and grants it “maximum protection.” In reality, since Atlanta has already removed the word from its website and its use was “limited,” it does not impose compensation or a fine. Images | Donuts In Xataka | There are people counterfeiting Rioja bottles and selling them in Vietnam: a growing problem for the wine industry

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.