Recently, we have observed that the increase in population in major cities (mainly in Athens and Thessaloniki) often leads to tensions between neighbors in buildings or single-family homes. Since many people are wondering how the law regulates this specific issue and what actions they can take, this text will outline the basic obligations that property owners must adhere to, primarily towards their neighbors. In addition, we will discuss the protection that the law provides in cases where individuals or their properties are affected by a neighbor.

1.What do we mean by neighbor law?

Neighbor law generally refers to the limitations that may be imposed on the ownership rights of each property owner due to coexistence with the corresponding rights of others. After all, for harmonious coexistence among multiple individuals, it is necessary that certain rights are restricted (either directly or indirectly) to avoid conflicts. Additionally, some prohibitions arise directly from the law (and thus do not require interpretation), while others are derived interpretatively from it. The main consequence of this is that the second category of prohibitions (e.g., a neighbor requesting access through another’s property) requires a contract or court decision and does not always establish a claim directly from the law. Finally, it is important to note that the provisions established by neighbor law do not constitute mandatory law; thus, they can be varied by agreement between the parties, and they generally operate between the parties (their validity does not extend to all simply because of an agreement between two property owners).

2.My neighbor is causing noise.What can I do?

The law stipulates that, in principle, a property owner must tolerate certain noise emissions from a neighboring property, but only if they are customary for the use of the property and do not exceed a necessary limit (e.g., if renovation is taking place in the apartment above and the work is not being done during designated quiet hours). It is worth noting that the balancing of interests here is done with objective criteria (what purpose the neighboring property serves) and not subjective ones (e.g., the character of the neighbor). Furthermore, it has been legally determined that it does not matter which of the two property owners has been in the area longer, nor whether the damaging actions occurred before the troubled neighbor moved into their property. Therefore, the owner of the affected property is entitled to file a negative action against their neighbor (Civil Code 1108) to seek the removal of the infringement and its cessation in the future (while a claim for damages is not excluded). Similarly, if they are not the owner but the possessor (e.g., a tenant renting a house they do not own), they can file an action for the disturbance of possession instead of a declaratory action and request precautionary measures for possession if they desire temporary judicial protection.

3.What claims do I have if a building is being constructed on a neighboring property?

In this case, the owner of the neighboring property has the following legal options:

• To request the prohibition of the entire installation on the neighboring property if it is being done in violation of the authority’s permit (even when there is no permit at all) or specific legal terms required (e.g., zoning regulations regarding the building coefficient).
• If the installation has been completed (e.g., a farm has been built on the neighboring property), they can request its removal, meaning their neighbor must abolish it only if it leads to excessively harmful and illegal consequences for the neighboring property. If these consequences are expected to occur in the future, they must be foreseen as certain and not merely as conjecture (according to the usual course of events).

4.What if it concerns a dilapidated building?

There are many instances where the construction of a building begins at the boundary with a neighboring property, but the necessary preparations for the foundation have not been made to ensure a solid construction (e.g., the necessary supports have not been placed in the ground). In this case, the owner of the neighboring property is protected from the possible collapse of the structure, which could lead to the complete destruction (and possibly) of their own property. Thus, they can demand that their neighbor take the necessary measures for the construction of the building (the culpability of both sides does not matter here); otherwise, they may undertake such measures themselves if they have an urgent character, without their action being considered initially illegal. Let us not forget that the law establishes objective liability for the owner/possessor of a building or construction that has collapsed and caused damage to another (they are primarily liable for compensation to the third party unless they prove that they were not at fault and that all due diligence rules were followed).

5.My property is landlocked (it does not have access to a road). Is there a solution?

According to the provisions of neighbor law, if a property lacks the necessary access to the road (without the owner’s fault) and it is necessary to pass through a neighboring property, the owner of the landlocked property has a claim against their neighbor for granting access to the road. Initially, this refers only to access to a public/shared road and only on the condition that the owner of the landlocked property offers reasonable compensation to the one granting the access (which should cover at least the expenses for constructing the access, as well as any potential decrease in the value of the property that grants the access).

In addition to this, four other elements are necessary for the establishment of access:

• A final court decision must be issued (that is, a decision that cannot be challenged by appeal or by objection to default judgment) stating the establishment of access for the respective property in favor of another.
• The decision must be recorded (at the corresponding cost) in the relevant land registry/cadastre where it operates (mainly for publicity reasons and for the knowledge of third parties).
• The claim for granting access is not only held by the owner of the landlocked property but also by other individuals (such as the usufructuary, the possessor, and in the case of co-ownership, each co-owner for their respective share of the property).
• The owner of the property who granted the access may request its abolition if the access becomes obsolete (even before the passage of 20 years, which is the rule).

6.To what extent must I tolerate repairs on a neighboring property?

Let’s assume that a building is being constructed on the adjacent plot (or renovations are taking place in the apartment above) and that the workers need to pass through my property to carry out the work (there may be no other way of access). The law states that I must tolerate the disturbances caused during the execution of the aforementioned works under two conditions:

• My use of the property is not excessively hindered by these works (e.g., access to and from it is not difficult).
• My neighbor has compensated for the temporary hindrance of use or has provided some security for it (e.g., they gave me an item as collateral in case our agreement is not upheld).
• The neighbor’s right is not exercised abusively (e.g., not during extreme time limits, within quiet hours, using my property when there is a better and less burdensome way).

7.What happens with property boundaries?How is regulation done?

The regulation here is applied incrementally, so we will try to present it in that manner:

• When the boundaries between two properties need construction/repair to be restored, each owner has the right (and the other has the corresponding obligation) to attempt to construct the boundaries of their properties with shared expenses.
• In the case where the boundaries of the properties are disputed, the owners can request the court to resolve them. It is important to note here that if the boundaries are so indistinct (almost nonexistent) the court will divide the disputed area into equal parts, and each owner will receive one of them.
• If the two properties are separated by a strip of land, a path, or another type of road through which they communicate, each owner has the right to use this passage provided that it does not disrupt the passage of the other. It is also worth noting that the costs in the case of construction/repair are equally borne by both owners, and this passage of land (regardless of its form) requires the decision of both (or more, if applicable) owners to change its use, abolish it, etc.

8.And regarding rainwater?

For this matter, reference is made to Articles 1024-1025 of the Civil Code, which stipulate:

• The owner of a property (urban or agricultural) that is lower than its neighboring property is obliged to accept waters (mainly natural, e.g., rainwater) that come from the higher property (provided that there is no human construction intervening).
• If a property has an issue, e.g., with its roof, and this way water is transferred to the neighboring house, then the owner of the defective property is obliged to repair their construction (by adding drainage for the water) with the main goal of preventing water from flowing into the neighboring property.
• If the owner of the property discovers that there is a source of water/well on it or creates one, they are obliged not to waste all the available water in the area and in any case to ensure that it is sufficient for the residents of the local community (thus, the owner does not have such an obligation if there is sufficient water in the area through other means or if it is a city where no problem arises).

9.Is there a well on my property/the neighboring property?Are there claims created?

Although specific laws have been issued today that regulate this matter more clearly (which will be a separate subject of analysis), it is worth examining the general framework in this case. Thus, it is defined that the owner of the property where there is a spring/well is obliged to supply water to the neighboring property under certain conditions:

• The water in the neighboring property is insufficient for all household (note: not professional) needs (such as washing clothes, watering the yard, etc.).
• The extent to which the neighbor can procure water from elsewhere (if this is possible without significant expense for them, then I am not obliged to grant it, but this is judged separately on a case-by-case basis).
• I must not deprive myself of the water necessary for my (basic and non-basic) needs.
• If I eventually provide water to the neighboring property, the neighbor must compensate me for this provision.

10.How do I exercise my claims?Until when do they not expire?

If one carefully observes the provisions of Articles 1003-1032, they will understand that for every right of the owner of the neighboring property, there corresponds an obligation of the property being granted (in any form). Therefore, if one of the two parties seeks judicial protection, they can simply claim through an extrajudicial notice or lawsuit the adherence to this obligation (this operates only between the two parties, not against everyone).

• Alongside the above possibility, the owner of the property and its possessor (but not a simple occupant, as their protection is not justified) have the right to file a negative lawsuit (seeking the cessation of illegal infringement occurring on the property, omission of such in the future, and possibly a claim for damages).
• They can also file a lawsuit for disturbance of possession (this is equivalent to the negative lawsuit, but it is filed by the possessor and not the owner; for example, a student renting an apartment that does not belong to them will likely choose this type of lawsuit because it is the only way they are legitimized to exercise their claim).
• As the law itself stipulates, claims arising from neighboring law are not subject to a statute of limitations. This regulation is particularly important because there is no risk of losing a short deadline and ultimately the cancellation of the claim. However, it is another matter that if the claim is exercised very late and has created the impression on the other side that it will not be exercised (e.g., a sudden claim for the provision of access while the owner of the property has been using another equally suitable road for 19 years), it will be considered as a weakening of the right. Thus, the right, although not expired, will practically be unexercisable.

Next to the client and his needs.

Athina Kontogianni-Lawyer

The above does not constitute legal advice, and no responsibility is assumed for it. For more information, please contact us.