RÉGIMEN JURÍDICO DE LAS OBRAS DE ACCESIBILIDAD EN FAVOR DE MAYORES Y DISCAPACITADOS. ESTUDIO DE LA REFORMA DE LA LPH POR LEY 51/2003, DE 2 DE DICIEMBRE.

Authors

  • TERESA ASUNCIÓN JIMÉNEZ PARÍS

Keywords:

HORIZONTAL PROPERTY AND DISABILITY

Abstract

Opportunities, non-discrimination and universal accessibility for persons with disabilities. Additional Provision 3 amends articles 10, 11 and 17 of Act 49/ 1960 of 21 July on horizontal property, introducing, for the first time in the Horizontal Property Act, as an important new feature, the concept of «persons over 70 years of age». The reform, which has indubitable beneficial effects for both the disabled and the elderly, does however give rise to a complex problem concerning the interpretation of the aforesaid articles. This paper attempts to untangle the problem. The issue is to determine what the new obligations of the tenants' association are in matters of accessibility (articles 10.1 and 10.2, Horizontal Property Act) and to specify the scope of any agreement made voluntarily (articles 11, 17 and 12, Horizontal Property Act). Of particular interest is the analysis of the concepts «to live, work and render altruistic or volunteer services» by the disabled or elderly person as a legitimating foundation of accessibility work, the analysis of questions concerning whether or not all persons over age 70 may be regarded on the same basis as disabled persons, majorities necessary for resolutions, the possibility that there may be dissidents and existing restrictions on the performance of mandatory and non-mandatory accessibility work. This original, exhaustive paper reconciles the rights of the elderly and the disabled with tenants, and it also offers some suggestive reflections on who should bear the cost of accessibility work.

Published

2008-01-01

Issue

Section

ESTUDIOS LEGISLATIVOS

How to Cite

RÉGIMEN JURÍDICO DE LAS OBRAS DE ACCESIBILIDAD EN FAVOR DE MAYORES Y DISCAPACITADOS. ESTUDIO DE LA REFORMA DE LA LPH POR LEY 51/2003, DE 2 DE DICIEMBRE. (2008). Critical Review of Real Estate Law, 708, 1621 a 1695. https://revistacritica.es/rcdi/article/view/2558