Legal Assistance with Demolition and Neighbour Law

Questioner

I have a legal question regarding the demolition of a shed by another party. I will try to be as complete as possible. At the end of my yard, across the entire width and partly at my neighbors on either side, there is a shed at right angles. The plot is therefore completely at right angles to my plot. This barn (+- 4/4.5 meters high incl windows) has been there for many decades and has been purchased by a housing association in the past period, I suspect somewhere in the past 3 years. They are now going to demolish the house and the barn, as well as many other houses around it, and rebuild the site. After development, the piece of land behind my plot will be transferred to a new buyer (so private property). This barn now forms the property boundary and, according to the cadastral data, is exactly on the property boundary and a section of the foundation extends below our plot. Now, in all probability, the demolition will start in a week, but so far we have not been able to reach an agreement with the housing association. Until everything is finished, they want to place a 'solid construction fence' (according to the project leader, a construction fence between poles) between our yard and the building site and only at a later stage, and after consultation with the person who bought the plot, talk further about a definitive solution. In the new situation, this will become the garden of the new plot and not a public road. In short, I would like the housing association to place a wall (max. 2 meters high) as an alternative in the short term. To date, the housing association has decided to demolish the shed without consultation (a permit has been granted for this) and without coming up with a concrete solution to fill the gap left by the demolition (8 meters wide). Now I understand from Book 5, article 49 that I can force the housing association to put up a wall but that I will also have to pay half. Article 54 is precisely about the fact that an owner of a building is disadvantaged. I cannot find an article that states that if a non-shared building is demolished and the person on the adjacent property is disproportionately disadvantaged, how this can be compensated. I saw a response earlier (http://www.rechtswinkel.nl/antwoorden/62033/goedemorgen-een-aannemer-wil-een-pand-slopen-waarvan-de-muur-op-de-onze-erfgrens-staat-wij.html) stating that there is something to be said for the other party to cover the costs, but is there any legal basis for this? Sorry for the long story but tried to make it as concrete as possible. I would like to know whether the housing association is allowed to demolish the barn and whether we have to accept the consequences or whether we can still enforce something, now that the objection period has not yet ended. After all, it is now a private individual against a housing association that is going to redevelop a large area for a lot of money. Thanks in advance for your time and effort.

Lawyer

If the shed wall is against the property boundary and not on it, then the owner, provided that he has any necessary environmental permit for demolition, may proceed as he pleases. He must of course not damage your property. No nuisance may otherwise be caused that can be qualified as a nuisance, but you will have to tolerate normal demolition and construction work. You write that the barn wall is on the property boundary, so partly on your land. Because it is not a freestanding dividing wall, nor a wall that two works have in common, there is no question of joint ownership under the law. The most far-reaching conclusion could be that the neighbours are not allowed to demolish the wall to the extent that it is on your land, because of your horizontal accession. However, since the wall is undeniably part of the shed and cannot be viewed separately from it (vertical accession), the position could be that the shed wall may be demolished, but that you must be compensated for the disadvantage/damage you experience. This could result in a wholly or more than half-paid by the neighbours, but a jointly owned, because free-standing dividing wall. The tricky part is that you actually only lose an advantage (not a wall partly paid for by you). In legal terms, the question is whether the loss of an advantage can be considered as suffering disadvantage/damage. However, as you yourself indicate, there is no direct legal basis on which you can claim that the new dividing wall should be paid for in whole or in part by the owner of the neighbouring plot.

Questioner

Thank you very much for your quick response. Clear conclusion and unfortunately a pity for me that you confirmed my suspicion but legally it is the way it is. Could you possibly indicate whether it is reasonable to demand within a short period (say 2/3 months) from the housing association to put up a new permanent fence (of course shared costs) and not, as is the current planning, to wait more than a year. Or whether the housing association should also be allowed to wait with this. I personally do not think the alternative of looking at a construction fence for a year is really a good solution. This is more what is reasonable and not what is legally feasible I think.

Lawyer

You have the right to the dividing wall, but you may not abuse the right. It is probably mainly a cost issue, as I understand that after development the housing association will sell the neighbouring plot and transfer ownership. Or the 'hanging iron' is passed on to the future owners. These will probably also be your new neighbours, so that in that context it may be more desirable to realise the dividing wall together with them. Here too, it applies that on the basis of the neighbour law you will have to tolerate some nuisance (including construction fencing) during the construction work. In short, although you will ultimately be able to exercise your right to a communal dividing wall, I cannot advise you to start legal proceedings against the housing association on this issue, provided that the new construction is completed within a reasonable period of time. What is possible is to enter into a discussion about the construction fence, so that it is carried out in such a way that you experience the least visual nuisance from it.