THE URBAN LEASE OF HOUSING AND ITS EFFECTS REGARDING THIRD PARTIES SINCE «FLEXIBLE MEASURES AND MARKET DEVELOPMENT OF RENTAL DWELLING» ACT, JUNE 4/2013

Authors

  • ELENA BELLOD FERNÁNDEZ DE PALENCIA

Keywords:

REGISTRATION, HOLDER, THIRD PARTY, UNENFORCEABILITY, ENFORCE ABILITY, GOOD FAITH

Abstract

The reform of the Urban Lease Act, as the Preamble of the Law 4/2013 of 4 June states, aims to relax and stimulate rental market; for this, the legislator has strengthened the protection of the lessor, mainly through the reduction of lease term, implied renewal and some other owners registry, through the mechanism of registration. Lease contract registered in the Land Registry will affect third parties having their right registered after according to the mortgage basic principles. Having into account the declaratory nature of registration, there is no absolute assert about unenforceable unregistered lease against third parties who have registered their rights, except in the cases expressly prescribed by the Urban Lease Act in reference to the holder of a vendor's option to repurchase from buyer on agreed terms, the right of preferential option purchase, trustee heir, mortgagee and any other that comes from an expropriation due to a sentence, as well as the third party purchaser of the leased housing. In all other cases in which the registration reality does not concur with the extraregistral reality, preference rights will be resolved according to the rules of priority payment in harmony with the mortgage basic principles. The legislature did not expressly require that the third party is not subrogated to the lease must act in good faith. Good faith where appropriate, will consist of the ignorance or unawareness of the existence of the lease.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Published

2015-01-01

Issue

Section

DICTUM AND NOTES

How to Cite

THE URBAN LEASE OF HOUSING AND ITS EFFECTS REGARDING THIRD PARTIES SINCE «FLEXIBLE MEASURES AND MARKET DEVELOPMENT OF RENTAL DWELLING» ACT, JUNE 4/2013. (2015). Critical Review of Real Estate Law, 752. https://revistacritica.es/rcdi/article/view/1477