My opinion on the trial of the case of lighting right
First, due to the generality of relevant laws and regulations, it is difficult to hear cases of lighting rights.
With the continuous improvement of citizens' legal awareness, there will be more and more cases of solving problems through legal means, and the neighboring relationship will be paid more and more attention. Adjacent relationship, that is, adjacent property relationship, refers to the owner or occupier of adjacent real estate? Does the user exercise ownership or possession of the real estate owned or occupied by him? When exercising their rights, neighboring obligees should give each other convenience and accept restrictions, resulting in a relationship of rights and obligations. The rights contained in this relationship are called neighboring rights. Neighborhood right is an inevitable and necessary interest based on the rights and obligations between adjacent properties.
At present, the courts mainly handle cases involving the right to light according to four laws: First, Article 19 of the Constitution stipulates that "the houses of the people and citizens of China are inviolable"; Second, Article 83 of the General Principles of the Civil Law stipulates that "the neighboring parties of real estate shall correctly handle the neighboring relations in terms of water interception, drainage, ventilation, transportation and lighting in accordance with the spirit of convenient production, convenient life, solidarity and mutual assistance, and fairness and reasonableness. If losses are caused to neighboring parties, the infringement shall be stopped? Remove obstacles and compensate for losses "; Third, Article 24 of the Real Estate Management Law stipulates that "urban planning must be strictly implemented in real estate development, and comprehensive planning, rational layout, comprehensive development and supporting construction should be implemented in accordance with the principle of unity of economic, social and environmental benefits"; Fourth, the relevant provisions in the planning law. Because the provisions of the above four laws on neighboring rights, including the right to light, are too general and difficult to operate, which brings great difficulties to judicial practice.
In practice, because the legal provisions and relevant judicial interpretations do not clearly stipulate the criteria for judging whether the neighbor's ventilation and lighting rights have been infringed, the court's handling of ventilation and lighting disputes mainly depends on the specific conditions of local land use, building planning, residents' living habits, etc., which is difficult to adapt to the complicated lighting rights disputes in reality, and it is obviously more difficult to reasonably safeguard the rights and interests of the parties and resolve disputes through litigation.
For example, Jiao and Li in Chengguan, Xinzhou City, Shanxi Province, where the author is located, are neighbors in the north and south. Jiao Yu1April 1996 began to build a two-story building. In late June, Li blocked the construction of Jiaojia Institute on the grounds that the building built by Jiaojia would affect the lighting, and the engineering team of Jiaojia Institute was forced to dismantle the model and support on the second floor and stop the construction. So Jiao and Li went to court. According to the facts ascertained by the court, Jiaojia's building is illegal in four aspects: 1. Jiaojia new building actually affects Li's lighting; 2. Jiaojia's building is an application procedure according to the bungalow, but it has been built into a two-story building; 3. Jiaojialou failed to handle the "Construction Land Planning Permit" and "Construction Project Planning Permit" as required, and Jiaojialou was an illegal building; 4. The land in Jiao Jia was transferred without the direct approval of the Bureau of Land and Resources. Failing to provide the court with the relevant approval documents and deed tax procedures for buying and selling land, the copy of the procedures for building the foundation of the real estate provided by Jiao is perjury. On this basis, the court conducted mediation, but Jiao disagreed. The basic spirit of the judgment of the court of first instance is that the original defendant's building is within the non-building area, referring to the spirit of the new (1992) No.96 document of Xinzhou Municipal People's Government? Hereinafter referred to as Document No.96, the sunshine interval shall not be less than 1.2 times of the height of the new building, and relevant judgments have been made accordingly. After the verdict was pronounced, Mr. Li refused to accept it and appealed. In the second trial, the court informed the Municipal Construction Bureau that the house was auctioned by the brick factory according to the provisions of Article 12 of Document No.96. At that time, when the brick factory auctioned the house, it was the planned construction area of the bungalow building. Now the buildings built by individual households will inevitably affect the lighting of adjacent houses, which is inconsistent with the original plan. In the second instance, according to the spirit of Document No.96 and the interpretation of the document by Xinzhou Construction Bureau, the judgment of the second instance was made according to the regulation that the sunshine interval is not less than 65438+ 0.5 times the height of the new building. Jiao still refuses to accept and appeals. During the complaint period, Jiao provided the certificate of 1999 issued by the Municipal Construction Bureau on May 30th, claiming that the housing construction projects of Jiao and both parties to the lighting dispute case have not gone to our bureau to handle the planning procedures, construction procedures, line inspection procedures and supervision procedures since they started, and they are not construction projects approved by our bureau. Therefore, it does not explain the lighting disputes between the two sides due to building houses. Before that, the explanation of lighting distance was based on the spirit of this paper. This case is full of twists and turns. What is the reason?
Article 8 of the new document [1992] No.96 has long stipulated: "The Municipal Construction Bureau and the town construction management agencies authorized by the Municipal Construction Bureau should carefully review the building spacing and the red line distance of construction concession in the process of examining and approving the' two certificates', that is, the construction land planning permit and the construction project planning permit. However, in the lighting dispute cases we accepted, it is illegal for a large number of litigants to have no "two certificates", but they stressed that the law should protect their lighting rights. The handling of such disputes often involves the vital interests of both parties, and the court must be cautious. On the one hand, it is emphasized that the relevant administrative law enforcement departments should confirm the rights according to law, on the other hand, it is hoped that litigants can improve their legal awareness, pay attention to the relevant legal requirements of urban planning and reduce unnecessary disputes in litigation.
Second, several problems that should be paid attention to in the trial of light rights.
(1) There are misunderstandings in the application of law.
According to Chinese laws, the legal effect of the Constitution, laws, local regulations and rules is gradually decreasing. When trying cases of neighboring rights such as lighting and ventilation, there is no clear provision in national laws. At present, only the proportion of latitude and longitude in different places is stipulated by the Ministry of Construction. For example, it is stipulated that Taiyuan in Shanxi is 1: 1.5, and Datong is 1: 1.5 to 1: 1.7, which is based on winter. The distance between the new building and the affected building should not be less than 1.98 times. However, the government departments in Xinzhou, Dingxiang and other places in our district have stipulated the ratio of cities 1: 1.2. Some judges judge cases according to this, and some judges handle cases according to 1: 1.5, which forms the phenomenon that the implementation of one regulation produces two results. In this regard, the content of local laws and regulations should be further clarified. If it is specific to the spirit and principles of legislation and defines the scope and standards of culture in combination with local actual conditions, it should be applied or referred to; National laws and regulations do not clearly stipulate that local laws and regulations can be applied or referred to without violating the basic principles of national laws; If it conflicts with the basic principles and spirit of laws and administrative regulations, reference cannot be applied; The interpretation of local laws and regulations made by the local legislature beyond the authority of local laws and regulations cannot be used as the basis for the court to hear cases.
(2) The author believes that in the trial of neighboring rights cases, we should grasp the following two aspects:
1. Handle disputes over neighboring rights in strict accordance with the principle of legality.
Article 83 of the General Principles of the Civil Law stipulates: "Neighboring relations such as water interception, drainage, ventilation, transportation and lighting should be handled correctly in the spirit of facilitating production and life, solidarity and mutual assistance, and fairness and rationality. If losses are caused to neighboring parties, the infringement shall be stopped, obstacles shall be removed, and losses shall be compensated ",which stipulates the legal principles for handling disputes over neighboring rights, that is, the spirit of facilitating production, facilitating life, solidarity and mutual assistance, fairness and reasonableness. Therefore, in handling disputes over neighboring relations, we should proceed from being beneficial to life and providing convenience for people's lives, safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of owners or users, and facilitate people's lives.
2. Make full use of mediation to resolve disputes.
Law is only the superstructure of the system category, and it seems unrealistic to exhaust all phenomena in life. When trying such cases under the condition of imperfect laws, on the one hand, we should strictly handle affairs according to law, on the other hand, we should strengthen mediation according to law and properly resolve civil disputes. For example, in the above case, did Mr. Jiao shelve the construction project for four years or even longer because he disagreed with the height of the house? Should the court decide to dismantle all these illegal buildings according to law? This is contrary to the statutory principles stipulated in the civil law. To this end, the judge proposed a mediation plan: the coke was capped at a height of 2.8 meters indoors, which had little impact on Li's lighting, and the house could be built, and the infringing part should be compensated as appropriate.
In recent years, with the economic development, the scale of real estate development has gradually expanded, and the relationship between adjacent rights of buildings has become one of the focuses of social contradictions. Most disputes over the right to light appear in the form of group litigation, which puts forward a new topic for the people's court.
The issue of lighting right is closely related to people's lives. China's Property Law brings the legal provisions of the right to light into the category of neighboring rights.
In recent years, some grass-roots courts in Urumqi have tried many civil cases based on disputes over lighting rights. Only the courts in the new urban areas hear dozens of such cases every year. Because the sunshine is blocked by newly-built buildings, and most of them are high-rise buildings, the surrounding residents obstruct the construction and even sometimes conflict. Based on the trial practice, the author puts forward some simple views on the disputes over adjacent lighting rights from the following aspects.
First, the causes of adjacent lighting disputes
Adjacent lighting means that two or more adjacent owners or users of real estate use sunlight and natural light to carry out activities such as production, life, work and study, which do not interfere with each other or hinder each other. Lighting right is a special civil right of the owner, possessor and user of adjacent real estate. Article 84 of China's Property Law stipulates that the neighboring owners of real estate should correctly handle the neighboring relations in accordance with the principles of favorable production, convenient life, solidarity and mutual assistance, and fairness and reasonableness. If it causes obstruction or damage to the neighboring party, it shall pay compensation. Article 89 of China's Property Law stipulates that the construction of buildings shall not violate the relevant national engineering construction standards, and shall not interfere with the ventilation, lighting and sunshine of adjacent buildings. The reason why the lighting right is included in the adjacent relationship is because the dispute over the lighting right depends on the grade of the adjacent building, and the subject is the owner or user of the adjacent real estate. The content is to ask the other party to provide convenience, and the other party should give necessary convenience, including lighting; The object is real estate, in fact, the object of lighting disputes is the interests generated by the exercise of real estate.
Adjacent relations are complicated, so there are many reasons for lighting disputes. According to the "People's Republic of China (PRC) Construction Planning Law", buildings must be subject to unified planning, which is beneficial to land conservation, long-term development and easy management. However, the actual urban planning is either backward or improper. Because of urban construction surveying and mapping, the ranking of houses was determined, but the height of houses was not uniformly limited. With the passage of time, people's requirements for housing conditions are getting higher and higher, and most buildings are developing to high-rise buildings. The previous planning has obviously fallen behind. The planning department only pays attention to the fees when approving the plan, and rarely makes field visits. Without inspection, it won't know the situation of its neighbors, so it can't objectively consider the height of the house. It will only approve the scheme with intention to report, which will lead to lighting disputes. This is caused by the planning department. Secondly, it is caused by the imbalance of various norms. According to the regulations of the Ministry of Construction, building houses must be planned by the planning department, examined and approved by the land department, designed by the design department and submitted for construction by the construction department. However, the existing units are uncoordinated and lack of effective supervision and restriction mechanism, which brings certain hidden dangers to adjacent lighting. The land department has no land for planning approval, and the planning department has no planning approval for building houses, which exceeds the authority of each other, so that the unified policy cannot be implemented, and the building is in anarchy, which brings many unfavorable factors to the adjacent relations and intensifies the formation of lighting disputes. Third, the lack of land resources has increased the number of disputes. With the increasing shortage of urban construction land, the state has strengthened the examination and approval and management of land use rights from a macro perspective, making urban land resources even scarcer, and the contradiction between the land needed for building and the land examination and approval strictly restricted by the state has become increasingly prominent. Some residential units can't meet their own needs, so they build houses on the original land and develop into the sky at will. Uncontrolled development led to lighting disputes. Fourth, the concept of legal system is weak. Generally speaking, the neighboring relationship is to provide convenience for each other, so as to achieve the purposes of facilitating production, facilitating life, solidarity and mutual assistance, and fairness and reasonableness. However, in real life, a considerable number of people know little about the neighboring relationship, only care about personal interests, ignore the interests of others, and even harm the interests of others, and exercise their rights on their own real estate, causing damage to the neighboring party. Fifth, the increase of illegal buildings affects lighting. Illegal construction refers to new houses built in violation of laws and regulations without planning or approval of relevant departments. In recent years, due to some units and individuals for their own interests, in the case of laws and regulations do not allow, illegal construction has occurred from time to time. Violators know that they have no right to build, and after private consultation with land owners, they reach a transfer agreement through black-box operation and forcibly build, thus affecting the interests of neighboring parties.
Second, the jurisdiction of adjacent lighting disputes
The lighting dispute is formed by adjacent buildings, and its jurisdiction, in my opinion, can be handled according to law in the following two cases.
Adjacent lighting disputes caused by illegal buildings or buildings beyond the scope of examination and approval shall, in principle, be handled by the urban construction department of the government according to law and removed within a time limit. If a party fails to perform the punishment decision and does not apply for administrative reconsideration or bring a lawsuit, it may apply to the people's court for compulsory execution by the urban construction department of the government, or it may be directly accepted by the people's court. The Summary of the National Symposium on Civil Trial Work stipulates: "The people's courts may accept civil disputes caused by illegal buildings that hinder the ventilation and lighting of others or by the sale, lease or mortgage of illegal buildings. The identification and demolition of illegal buildings are not civil disputes and should be handled by relevant administrative departments according to law. "
Disputes arising from the construction of buildings approved by the relevant authorities according to law also fall within the scope of accepting cases by the people's courts and should be actively accepted. Because: (1) daylighting disputes meet the acceptance conditions stipulated in Article 108 of the Civil Procedure Law. The characteristics of lighting disputes are: based on the fact that real estate is adjacent, the subject is the owner or occupier of adjacent or adjacent real estate, and the object is not the object of ownership itself, but the mutually adjacent interests arising from use; One of the neighbors has the right to ask the other not to do something to promote it. Lighting is influenced by neighboring buildings. Therefore, the parties involved in building houses and other buildings should keep their buildings at an appropriate distance from their neighbors' houses or buildings. Neighbors have the right to ask the built buildings to take measures to eliminate the lighting of their houses or buildings. (2) Adjacent lighting disputes belong to the scope of civil adjustment. Daylighting disputes belong to the category of property rights, and the property law lists daylighting as an adjacent relationship, which is in line with the adjustment object of the property law. Neighborhood itself is to give convenience, which is manifested in the limitation and extension of ownership. One party requires the convenience of the neighboring party, and the provider restricts its ownership. The provider is the beneficiary, and his own ownership is extended. According to the principle of fairness, the restricted person should be compensated and the beneficiary should be compensated. Therefore, the people's court has jurisdiction over daylighting disputes.
For example, a 48-household "sunshine lawsuit" tried by the court in Urumqi New Town. In February 2007, 48 households living in Henan West Road, Xincheng District, Urumqi filed a lawsuit, taking the real estate developer to court. They shouted: "In order not to live in the shadow of the sun all day, we ask the court to order the defendant to stop the infringement, remove the obstacles and restore the lighting of the plaintiff's house." To this end, they brought a developer unit in Xinjiang to court to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests according to law. Urumqi New Town People's Court accepted the case.
In April 2004, the defendant developed a residential area located in Henan Road, a new urban area, in which two buildings were adjacent to the residential area where the plaintiff lived. The residential areas developed by the defendant are all high-rise residential buildings with a height of 18 floors. At the beginning of the construction, the plaintiff had coordinated with the defendant's on-site staff, and the defendant claimed that the building was 8 floors and would not affect the plaintiff's life. However, with the passage of time, the defendant's floor was built higher and higher, and the house where the plaintiff lived gradually lost sunshine. By June of 5438+00, the building developed by the defendant was completely capped, and two buildings with a height of 18 blocked the lighting of 48 households, resulting in the plaintiff's lack of light all day and living by artificial light sources in broad daylight.
Residents said in the indictment: "As a professional real estate developer, the defendant illegally deprived 48 households of their lighting rights in order to obtain benefits, and ignored the rights of neighbors in the development of the community. This is a serious infringement, which has caused damage to the plaintiff's personal and property rights, so that the house has been deprived of sunshine all day. Therefore, we ask your hospital to support the plaintiff's request according to law and order the defendant to remove obstacles and restore the lighting of the plaintiff's residence. "
It is reported that before the prosecution, residents have repeatedly consulted developers, petitioned the municipal party Committee and municipal government, and found the Municipal Planning Bureau and other departments. Because many consultations failed, I petitioned again. Later, it was discouraged by the relevant departments. From the foundation excavation, residents and developers have been arguing about the lighting problem until the building is capped. Residents have enough indoor sunshine blocked by two high-rise buildings with 0/8 floors/kloc-,so they have to turn on the lights all day long, and they can't enjoy much sunshine indoors in winter.
The residents had no choice but to ask lawyers to go to court for justice.
After the prosecution, residents were worried that their rights and interests would not be supported by the court, and they went to the functional departments of Urumqi government to complain and petition. After learning the specific case, the government staff called relevant personnel to hold meetings and consultations several times.
This case has attracted great attention from the courts in the new urban areas. Guan Ling, the judge in charge of the case and vice president of the First People's Court, carefully consulted the case file, visited it on the spot many times, and combined with the specific conditions of both parties, made mediation work for both the original and the defendant before the trial. Because the relevant government departments did the appeasement and explanation work, the contradiction between the original and the defendant was basically solved. Visited and investigated the developers, the Municipal Planning Bureau and other departments. Understand the situation from them, publicize and explain the relevant provisions of the neighboring rights case law in detail, and clearly point out the illegality of its infringement by case statement. On the other hand, judges patiently do the ideological work of residents. After several painstaking efforts, the judge asked the developer to come up with the best solution to the problem. Developers are willing to provide replacement houses for 48 households. Hearing this, the residents all expressed satisfaction. At present, the two sides have entered the negotiation stage on the replacement. Finally, the two sides "melted the ice and melted the snow", and the rights and interests of 48 households were protected. On September 6, before the trial, they submitted an application for withdrawal to the court. The court ruled that the plaintiff was allowed to withdraw the lawsuit according to law.
The conclusion of the case seems normal, but it is the simplest, strongest and most urgent expectation of the parties to the judge who tried their case. In China, litigation is usually the last resort to resolve disputes. Contradictions have existed for a long time before they developed into litigation, and most of the emotions of the opposing parties have intensified, which often becomes one of the reasons why the case can't be closed.
Relying on the law to solve disputes is undoubtedly very lucky for the parties-long-standing disputes, unresolved grievances and unresolved knots will dissipate with the conclusion of the case, the restless life order will return to the right track, and the tense and embarrassing interpersonal relationship will return to normal, so there is no need to worry about the lawsuit all day long.
A neighborhood aunt said: "We have no money to buy a house or move, and our children and grandchildren have to live here. What's the use of asking for so little money? The days without sunshine will be the most painful life! " Another old lady said to the author: "When you are old, you are prone to diseases such as low back and leg pain, and you have to bask in the sun in the house in winter to be comfortable. We old people have no other enjoyment. Should we be deprived of this little sunshine? It is the court that decides for us and completely solves the problem for us. When we move to the new building, we will enjoy the light of life and live a happy life. "
Three, the principle of handling disputes between adjacent lighting.
With the gradual improvement of people's requirements for living conditions, especially in the north, the sunshine rights of bedrooms have been paid more and more attention. A few years ago, when people chose housing, they considered whether the area was large or not and whether the room layout was reasonable. People nowadays pay more attention to the living environment. Besides cultural atmosphere, air sunshine is one of the most important necessary conditions. Now all new residential areas in Urumqi should consider adequate indoor sunshine to popularize. In front of the completed residential area, when building a new building, the sunshine of the original residential houses shall not be blocked. Therefore, the Property Law, which was implemented on June+10/October 1 day, 65438, systematically stipulated the water use, drainage, lighting, transportation, construction, etc. of neighboring real estate owners. For example, it is stipulated that ventilation and lighting should not be hindered, that is, buildings should be built, and ventilation, lighting and sunshine of adjacent buildings should not be hindered in violation of relevant national engineering construction standards. At the same time, the property law also has standards for many sunshine.
The Property Law stipulates that the construction of buildings shall not violate the relevant national engineering construction standards, and shall not interfere with the ventilation, lighting and sunshine of adjacent buildings. China's "Code for Planning and Design of Urban Residential Areas" stipulates the sunshine standard of urban residential areas: in big cities in climate zones I, II, III and VII, the sunshine should be no less than 2 hours based on the severe cold day; Small and medium-sized cities in the above-mentioned climatic zones and big cities in the fourth climatic zone shall take severe cold days as the standard, and the sunshine time shall not be less than 3 hours; Small and medium-sized cities in the fourth climate zone and cities at all levels in the fifth and sixth climate zones shall be subject to the winter solstice, and the sunshine hours shall not be less than 1 hour. The author believes that the following principles should be followed in dealing with disputes over lighting rights:
(1) principle of fairness. The subject of adjacent lighting disputes is the owner or user of adjacent real estate, which has a certain emotional foundation and will live together for a long time in the future. Therefore, mediation or judgment can be made to the injured party to give the injured party some economic compensation, which embodies the principle of consistency of rights and obligations. Or the infringer can modify the building scheme appropriately, and then give some compensation to take care of the lighting needs of neighboring parties to the maximum extent.
(2) the principle of legality. Based on the dispute between adjacent real estate owners and users due to lighting, it is necessary to examine whether the builder has a land use right certificate and whether it is used beyond the limit; Whether there is a certificate of approval for urban construction planning, and whether it exceeds the approved construction area and quantity. Review whether the neighboring party has the house ownership certificate or the land use right certificate. Because the ownership, possession and use right of houses can only be protected by law on the premise of legality. The constitution of civil liability for tort damage requires four elements: the existence of damage facts, the causal relationship between tort and damage facts, the fault of the actor and the illegality of the act. Therefore, the legality review should be the first. If the owner's land use certificate, construction permit and other documents are complete, and the other party's property is illegal or illegal, its rights and interests can not be protected because of the loss of legal basis, so it is impossible to defend the owner, so the other party's request for lighting rights should be rejected. If the construction party fails to provide the legal procedures for its building before the end of the court debate, and it also infringes on the lighting rights of the neighboring parties, it shall be ordered to dismantle it within a time limit and remove obstacles.
(3) the principle of compensation. Both sides of adjacent houses have legal procedures or property certificates, and if it is impossible for the construction party to dismantle them, the neighboring parties shall be given certain economic compensation in consideration of the degree of limited lighting and the distance between houses.
Fourth, the compensation standard for lighting disputes
From a little-known term at first, the right to light has become an increasingly valued right to exist. It has gone through a long and small road, and it also reflects the gradual improvement of people's living standards and the pursuit of higher quality of life. People expect it to get better attention and protection. In foreign countries, many scholars even think that the right to sunshine and lighting is not a property right, but a personality right. It is not only closely related to life and health, but also includes the comfort and tranquility of life. After all, sunshine can't be bought for thousands of dollars. Daylighting disputes are generally stipulated in the property law, which is difficult to handle. Therefore, the compensation standard should be carefully examined. If the lighting right of the party requesting convenience is infringed due to a dispute between adjacent lighting, the obstruction shall be removed and the loss shall be compensated. In view of the complexity of the adjacent relationship, it should be considered from the perspective of the long-term coexistence of real estate owners and occupiers, which is conducive to unity and mutual assistance. If the obstruction can be removed, the buildings that affect the lighting part shall be ordered to be removed. If it cannot be eliminated, measures should be taken as far as possible to remedy the lighting of the infringed party. At present, there is no similar regulation in our district, and Beijing has made some regulations on the spacing of new houses as early as 1994 "Interim Provisions on the spacing of residential buildings in Beijing", but even if buildings are built according to this regulation, it is inevitable to block the sunshine of some houses. Article 13 of Chapter IV "How to deal with the sunshine in existing residential buildings" stipulates: "If the sunshine time in the center of the living room window sill is less than 1 hour, each household will be given a one-time compensation of 800 yuan to 2,000 yuan according to the situation that the living room is blocked. Illegal buildings and residential houses will not be compensated beyond the horizontal distance of twice the height of new buildings. " This compensation standard has caused great controversy in practice. The significance of sunshine to human life is self-evident, and the impact of living in a house without sunshine all the year round on residents can be equally imagined by anyone. This not only brings inconvenience to life, but also means a decline in the quality of life. Many residents scrimp and save their lives to buy real estate, hoping that future generations can live and work here. As little as 800 yuan to 2000 yuan, they traded their own and future generations' lighting rights, which is obviously unacceptable to many residents who attach great importance to sunshine. Moreover, this compensation standard is based on the living standard and consumption level at that time, which has its reasonable and realistic side. But after more than ten years of practice, people's living standards have been greatly improved, and people's requirements for quality and taste of life are constantly improving. Based on the principle of fairness in the Property Law, people's right to enjoy the sunshine all their lives in the house should be adjusted. This not only conforms to the legislative intention of the country, but also conforms to the policy spirit of keeping pace with the times. In my opinion, the amount of compensation should consider the following two points: (1) depreciation of the injured party's house. The infringer has made full use of space because of the development of his buildings to high altitude, and his houses have increased greatly, or the high-rise buildings built by the infringer are purely for the development of commercial houses, so the economic benefits of the infringer's building are self-evident. In sharp contrast, the houses in the neighboring areas have been affected by lighting, and their houses have fallen sharply on the basis of the original value. Because the value of the house depends on key factors such as location, orientation and lighting, the price evaluation department should be entrusted to evaluate the original value of the injured party and the value of the affected lighting, and the difference should be within the scope of compensation. Or another option, the builder buys the house of the neighbor at the original price, and the victim buys the new house. (2) The cost of remedial measures taken by the injured party. Due to the need of lighting, the injured party needs to change the original building structure, such as increasing the area of doors and windows and opening skylights. And this cost should be within the scope of compensation. In addition, the injured party's use time of indoor lighting equipment is relatively prolonged due to insufficient lighting, which has a great impact on the service life and energy consumption of lighting equipment, so a one-time compensation fee may be considered as appropriate.
Verb (abbreviation of verb) Suggestions on preventing disputes over lighting rights
Through the trial and investigation of the case, the author found that the dispute of lighting right is not inevitable. In order to prevent and reduce disputes over urban lighting rights, the following suggestions are put forward:
(A) the government should strengthen the supervision of the construction market.
At present, the construction market is mainly managed by government administrative agencies. Therefore, the relevant government departments should further strengthen the unified management of the construction market, establish a strict supervision mechanism for construction projects, and strictly implement the planning requirements for construction projects approved by the government planning department. For projects that violate the planning requirements and exceed the planning, it is necessary to find them in time and investigate them in time. In particular, it is necessary to formulate administrative regulations for compulsory demolition of illegal buildings to protect the rights of legitimate building owners.
(two) to further strengthen the construction of social credit mechanism.
At present, the whole society is advocating the construction of credit mechanism. For building developers, they should keep the most basic conscience, build high-quality and cheap houses for the society, and don't base their interests on illegal development and illegal construction. Ordinary urban residents should also enhance social morality. The behavior of unauthorized construction can only cause inconvenience to others' lives and bring troubles and contradictions, so they can't infringe on others' happiness and rights for their own benefit.
(3) Increase penalties for illegal developers.
Buildings with complete structure, reasonable design, qualified construction quality and meeting the requirements of architectural planning have a service life of more than 50 years. Once the infringing building is completed and put into use, there is a dispute over lighting rights, and most plaintiffs demand the demolition of the infringing building. In the trial practice, most people can't make judgments according to the requirements of the parties, because the social wealth consumed by demolition is far greater than the compensation demand for the obligee, which is not the ultimate goal of legal pursuit. Therefore, one-time compensation or compensation for the obligee has become the only way to solve the dispute case of lighting right. Although the right relief of the obligee has been solved through litigation, the developer who violates the construction approval scheme should be given administrative punishment to balance social relations and alleviate social contradictions.