한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

xu's lawsuit: xu, an owner of a residential complex in linqing, was inconvenienced by the property management company's unauthorized installation of an ic card system, so he filed a lawsuit in court, demanding the removal of these unauthorized devices. he believed that the property management company's actions violated his rights and interests, causing inconvenience in his daily life. xu believed that the function of the elevator had been changed, which directly affected his life and travel.

the property company defended: the property management company refuted that its operation was legal and had no substantial impact on the use of the elevator. they believed that installing the ic card system was an obligation of the owners to jointly manage and was also part of the property management service, and accused xu of improperly asserting his rights.

court hearing and legal interpretation: when hearing this case, the court clearly stated, based on relevant legal provisions, that matters jointly decided by owners must be agreed upon by more than two-thirds of the owners in terms of both the area and number of owners of the exclusive part. the property management company's behavior obviously did not follow this legal process, so the court rejected xu's lawsuit, but also pointed out the inappropriateness of the property management company.

law and life:

this case reminds us that whether in the international express delivery industry or in residential community management, we need to ensure the legality and efficiency of the process. in particular, when dealing with internal community affairs, we must follow legal procedures and respect the co-decision rights of the owners. at the same time, it also reminds us that we need to pay enough attention to and protect the legal process and user rights.