From the series Living, Land & Law: Fortnight Insights – Article 3
Does a property owner have the right to access a neighbouring roof if it contains facilities like water tanks?
Article 400 of the Civil Code defines an easement as “a right established for the advantage of a tenement over another tenement belonging to another person, for the purpose of making use of such other tenement or of restraining the owner from the free use thereof”. Then, in terms of the article which follows, easements can be created in two ways: either by law or by an act of man. When it comes to the latter, the law states that it shall be lawful for the owners to establish any easement which they desire, as long as it does not go counter to public policy.
When it comes to examining what easements, tenements have over neighbouring property, the point of departure would be to examine the deed of sale. Does the contract of sale allow for the tenement of a property, to access the roof of another, and place his/her water tanks over the roof? And if so, does the former tenement pay a share of maintenance expenses of the roof?
One judgement which can be referred to is Licari vs Gusman, decided on the 15th of June 2023. In this case, the dominant tenement requested the court to declare that she had the right of perpetual use and passage over the roof belonging to the defendant. Use, in this case, was limited to a water tank, television aerial and dish antenna. The court, in this case, had categorised this easement as discontinuous and non-apparent, making Article 469(1) of the Civil Code applicable to it. In terms of this sub-article, continuous non-apparent easements must be created by a valid title and cannot be obtained by the passage of time.
Then, the law also requires that a title which creates an easement must result from a public deed, in the absence of which the right to an easement is null. The court further stated that if the easement, which is established in a public deed is normal and reasonable use thereof is made, whereby it does not hinder the other owners from the enjoyment of the roof, then, the exercise of the easement itself should be allowed, and that, in line with Article 474(1) of the Civil Code, the owners of the roof cannot do anything which restrict the use of the easement, by making it more burdensome.
Then, as confirmed in the judgement of Christoper and Marisa Galea vs Emanuel and Maria Concetta Spiteri, if owners of a particular tenement place a water tank on the roof, which does not belong to them, and other flat owners did not complain on such, nonetheless, this still does not give them the right to keep the water tank.
Therefore, from this it can be concluded that the right of passage over the roof belonging to another tenement and the use thereof is only permissible if the easement has been accounted for in the deed of sale. If this has not been included, then, the tenement cannot arbitrarily decide to place his water tank over the roof, if he has no ownership thereof. On the other hand, if the contract of sale permits such use and placement, then, the owners of the roof cannot hinder its application.
马耳他 Sciberras Advocates 的房地产法律专家团队随时准备协助您处理可能遇到的任何法律问题。请随时通过 [email protected] 联系我们，获取专业支持。.
本文仅供参考，不应被视为法律建议。.
本文及研究由凯特琳·特纳女士完成，她目前正在马耳他大学攻读法学学士（荣誉）学位.
Sciberras Advocates 由 Adrian Sciberras 博士创立，是一家总部位于马耳他的律师事务所。该事务所以其多学科、创新和灵活的特点而自豪，能够应对不断变化的时代以及本地和国际法律环境中的任何挑战。无论面临何种复杂私人或公司需求，Sciberras Advocates 都能提供切合实际且具有成本效益的法律解决方案，以实现您期望的结果。您可以通过电话联系 Sciberras Advocates： +35627795222或通过电子邮件发送至 [email protected].
