The Legal Battle of Tania: A Nonagenarian Struggling for an Elevator
At over 90 years old, Tania (a pseudonym created by the Judiciary to ensure anonymity) will not have an elevator. After more than five years of fighting, this nonagenarian with mobility issues in Hospitalet De Llobregat has lost a long legal battle against her landlord, the owner of a 12-apartment building, to have an elevator installed that would allow her to leave her home.
Legal Dispute Over an Elevator
In 2022, however, Tania won the first legal round to obtain an elevator that was vital for her to be able to leave her home. Initially, after analyzing the economic capacity of the defendant, the investigating judge ruled in favor of Tania and ordered the owner to build the elevator, with the condition that the owner could later pass on the cost to the tenants.
However, dissatisfied, the property owner appealed the decision. The Barcelona Provincial Court has upheld her appeal. According to the judges, despite Tania’s mobility problems, there is no legal reason to compel the owner to bear the cost of the construction or to accept it.
An Ancient Law
The ruling, dated December 27, 2024, but not previously reported in the press (you can read it in full here), provides several reasons for this stance. The main point of contention lies in which law to apply. The issue for Tania is that, since the lease was signed in 1961, the judges believe that the current regulations should not apply, but rather the applicable law is the old legislation. The Catalan Civil Code is also not applicable, the judges reason, as the building does not have the status of horizontal property.
The legal hurdle that burdens Tania lies in the Urban Leases Law of 1964. This law stipulates that, to compel a homeowner to carry out a work, the modification must strictly fit the concept of “necessary repair.”
The key to the case lies in this term, drafted over 60 years ago. With these foundations, the judges understand that the installation of an elevator does not fit within the concept of “repair.” “The term used is that of ‘repairs’,” the ruling states, which requires “the action of repairing, which is fixing something that is broken or damaged.” In other words, it starts from something preexisting and not new.
Neighbors’ Testimonies
As a result, the Court rules against Tania and in favor of the landlady. There will be no elevator. However, the judges refrain from condemning the elderly woman to pay the legal costs by acknowledging that the case posed a significant legal challenge.
The judicial rigor contrasts with Tania’s reality, and with that of other elderly residents living in the same building in Hospitalet. Tania’s daughter recounted in court that, on one occasion, firefighters had to remove her mother through the window with a crane for a medical emergency; due to her medical condition, moving her down the stairs was impossible.
Another witness, the son of another tenant – the building consists of 12 apartments, all owned by the same landlord, five of which are under old rent contracts, paying 130 euros per month, six under recent leases, and one is vacant – stated that his father has not left the house for a year because going down the stairs is a nightmare. The last two years of his mother’s life were also confined: the stairs, again, were an insurmountable obstacle.
Conclusion
The legal battle between Tania and her landlady over the installation of an elevator has come to a disappointing conclusion. Despite the pressing need for an elevator for Tania’s mobility, the court’s interpretation of the law has denied her the right to have one installed. This case sheds light on the intersection of legal technicalities and human welfare, highlighting the challenges faced by elderly individuals in accessing essential amenities.
FAQs
1. Can Tania appeal the court’s decision?
As of now, Tania has exhausted her legal options in the battle for the elevator. However, she may explore other avenues or seek alternative solutions to improve her mobility within her home.
2. What are the implications of this ruling for other elderly individuals in similar situations?
This ruling sets a precedent that may impact other elderly individuals living in buildings without elevators. It underscores the importance of ensuring accessibility and accommodation for individuals with mobility issues, especially in aging populations.