The house was blocked by the tallest building in Nanjing, and the man compensated 65,438+10,000 yuan.

Public trust. Com Nanjing165438+1October 23rd Six years ago, Mr. Chen's parents sued for rights protection because his house was blocked by the tallest building "Zifeng Building" in Nanjing, but later withdrew the lawsuit for some reason. Six years later, Mr. Chen filed a lawsuit again, demanding the right to sunshine and claiming a loss of 65,438+10,000 yuan according to law. This morning, the People's Court of Gulou District, Nanjing City, Jiangsu Province made a first-instance judgment on this dispute over the right to sunshine, and sentenced the defendant Nanjing State-owned Greenland Financial Center (hereinafter referred to as Nanjing State-owned Greenland) to compensate the plaintiff Mr. Chen 6,543,800 yuan in one lump sum.

Six years ago, the plaintiff's house was blocked by the defendant "Zifeng Building", the tallest building in Nanjing. Mr. Chen's elderly parents sued for rights protection, and later dropped the lawsuit for some reason. Six years later, the son of the old couple, the plaintiff in this case, filed a lawsuit again, demanding the right to sunshine, and claimed a loss of 65,438+10,000 yuan according to law. This time, the court supported all his claims.

In 2004, as an acrobat, Mr. Chen bought a property right house in Room 203, a building in Sunshine Pavilion Community, Houzai Lane, this city. This house covers an area of1.70m2, facing south, with good natural lighting conditions. It is precisely because of this that Mr. Chen took a fancy to it and made up his mind to buy this property for his elderly parents. In 2005, the construction of "Zifeng Building", a state-owned green space in Nanjing, was started and completed on 20 10. After the building is completed, it stands tall in Nanjing Gulou Square, with a height of 358 meters. "Zifeng Building" has become a new landmark in Nanjing, but it has also caused some disputes with the surrounding citizens, mainly because the building has hindered the lighting of some surrounding residents' homes and directly affected Mr. Chen's home.

In May 2007, Nanjing State-owned Greenland informed Mr. Chen's parents and the owners of three other adjacent houses to discuss the influence of Zifeng Building on their lighting, and paid 50,000 yuan compensation to the other three houses that year, but there was no Mr. Chen's family. Later, Mr. Chen went to Nanjing state-owned green space to negotiate, but the other party said that Mr. Chen's home met the sunshine standard, so he refused to pay compensation. On 20 10, Mr. Chen's parents took the state-owned green space in Nanjing to court, but later dropped the lawsuit for some reason. After that, Mr. Chen took over his parents' rights protection actions and kept consulting with Nanjing state-owned green space, but the other party just didn't give a clear answer. In desperation, in May this year, Mr. Chen sued the state-owned green space in Nanjing to the Gulou District Court in Nanjing, claiming that the "Zifeng Building" built by the defendant violated his family's right to sunshine, and demanded that the defendant compensate him for the loss of 6,543,800 yuan at one time.

During the trial of this case, the defendant Nanjing State-owned Greenland argued that the lighting in Room 203 where the plaintiff was located met the national standards, and the plaintiff's claim had exceeded the limitation of action, and the plaintiff's claim for compensation of 6,543,800 yuan had no factual and legal basis. Therefore, the court is requested to reject the plaintiff's claim. During the trial, although both parties were willing to mediate, the mediation ended in vain because they could not reach an agreement on the amount of compensation.

Today, the Gulou District Court of Nanjing made a first-instance judgment on this case. The court held that according to the provisions of the Property Law, the dispute between the parties in this case belongs to the dispute of sunshine right. The sunshine analysis chart issued by Nanjing Urban Planning Research Center shows that before the construction of Zifeng Building, the continuous sunshine time of Room 203 where the plaintiff lived was greater than 1.5 and less than 2.5, and the cumulative sunshine time was greater than 1.5 and less than 3.5. After the completion of "Zifeng Mansion", the continuous sunshine time of Room 203 in cold weather is more than one, less than one and a half, and the cumulative sunshine time is more than one, less than two. Based on this, it can be concluded that the sunshine time in Room 203 is obviously reduced after the completion of Zifeng Building, and the direct reason for the reduction is the influence of Zifeng Building.

According to China's "Code for Design of Urban Residential Areas", Nanjing stipulates that the sunshine of residential buildings should reach the second-class standard or above in severe cold weather. The regulation also specifies three specific situations, one of which is: "Adding any facilities outside the original design building shall not reduce the original sunshine standard of adjacent houses". In this case, the defendant violated this regulation, which not only reduced the sunshine time in Room 203, but also was lower than the national standard that the cumulative sunshine time in severe cold days was greater than or equal to 2. The defendant argued that the sunshine of the plaintiff's house was all up to standard, which was inconsistent with the facts and was not accepted by the court. At the same time, the court also held that since 20 10, the plaintiff has been negotiating with the defendant to safeguard his right to sunshine, so his prosecution did not exceed the statute of limitations.

In the end, the court made the above judgment on this case according to the facts ascertained, the actual situation of this case and the relevant provisions of the General Principles of Civil Law, Property Law, Civil Procedure Law and relevant judicial interpretations.

The presiding judge explained that the importance of the right to sunshine to the right to life is the key to ruling this case.

In this case, why did the court support the plaintiff's claim of 654.38+10,000 yuan? In this regard, the presiding judge Wu Jiaqing explained this.

Wu Jiaqing said that life is inseparable from sunshine, which is not only important for life, but also important for health. Cities need to develop and tall buildings need to be built, but the public's sunshine right, that is, the "sunshine right", needs to be protected. Because of this, the state and local governments have issued relevant rigid standards, and these rigid standards are precisely the basis of court decisions.

Wu Jiaqing also said that the plaintiff, as the property owner of the house in Room 203 of Sunshine Pavilion, should be protected by law. After the completion of "Zifeng Mansion", the sunshine time of all the plaintiff's houses will be reduced below the national standard, which will inevitably have a tangible or intangible impact on the health and life of the plaintiff and his family. As the builder and owner of Zifeng Mansion, the defendant should compensate the neighboring obligee for the damage caused by Zifeng Mansion in time, but both parties failed to reach an agreement on this. Combined with the degree of sunshine reduction in Room 203 and the impact of sunshine reduction on the plaintiff's family life, personal health and house value, the court held that the plaintiff's claim for compensation of 654.38 million yuan was reasonable and should be supported by the court.