DISPUTED RENTAL LAW

What does the decision of the Constitutional Court overshadowed by the decisions on the Headquarters mean: The consequences will be far-reaching It is already clear that the Constitutional Court has repealed key parts of the controversial law ... By: Željka GodečPosted: September 16, 2020 9:20 am Peaceful protest of the Tenants' Association Peaceful protest of the Tenants' Association Bozidar Vukicevic / Cropix Facebook Twitter Messenger E-mail The Constitutional Court on Monday concluded that the state has not fulfilled its positive obligation in “resolving the relationship between apartment owners and protected tenants, tenants in apartments in the so-called privately owned ”and that in securing the property rights of landlords it transferred the excessive burden to protected tenants. Therefore, they have repealed certain articles of the Law on Lease of Apartments, but it is not yet known exactly which ones, as well as Article 6 of the Law on Amendments to the Law on Lease of Apartments. Although the explanation of the Constitutional Court's decision has yet to be seen, which will show the guidelines that the Ministry of Construction must follow in drafting the new version of the Law, it is already clear that the Constitutional Court has repealed key parts of the law that will have far-reaching consequences for protected tenants. they feared it would end up on the road because of him, and owners who have been waiting decades for the return of their property. 1. Does the decision of the Constitutional Court abolish the deadline of 1 September 2023, defined in the Act as the deadline by which tenants should move out and hand over the apartments in which they live in the possession of the former owners? Marko Fak , lawyer of the Croatian Tenants' Association, arguing that things will be much clearer from the reasoning of the Constitutional Court because, as he emphasizes, "we still do not know for what reasons the Constitutional Court decided so, but the law is one whole and 'and the whole law', he explains that the deadline for eviction has now fallen into the water. - That is the most important and best thing for tenants - claims Fak. 2. Did the protected tenants get the green light to stay in the apartment for life? - With the repeal of the Act, the 1996 Lease Act is activated again, according to which everyone who was in the apartment on the day the Act was passed had the right to remain in it for life. It remains to be seen whether the Ministry will devise a new model - because the question remains how the rights of owners arising from the Statileo case will be respected - says Fak. In the Statileo case, the European Court of Human Rights in July 2014 recognized the right of owners of foreclosed properties to suffer damage due to limited property rights and symbolic amounts of protected rent and imposed an obligation on the state to pay the difference to market rent. - The state must turn its back on resolving this issue in a fair and honest manner and stop transferring it to the citizens, either tenants or owners - Fak emphasizes. 3. Has this decision recognized the protected tenants' right to purchase apartments, as did 300,000 citizens, holders of tenancy rights in socially-owned apartments? - No, but an obligation has been imposed on the state that it must treat them in the same way - Fak believes. - The occupancy right was abolished by the Law on Lease and it is not subsequently subsequently recognized to protected tenants, but their status has returned to the starting position. This problem is still open, but the Government now has an obligation to solve it more rationally and fairly, and not to break it over the knee. The basic position is that protected tenants must not be in a discriminatory position in relation to those who bought apartments - it is the same set of property rights; some were allowed, and protected tenants were exempted from that right, their tenancy rights were converted into protected tenant status. This is a very complex issue that has been unresolved since 1959, and since then the authorities have only deposited one injustice on another - he explains. Igor Leskovar , president of the Association of Property and Possession, believes that “the state transferred the problem exclusively to the owners, allowing people to live in apartments of 80 square meters for 200 kuna, and could find ways to adequately take care of them. The state encountered a boycott because, apart from apartments in excellent locations in the center of Zagreb, Split and Osijek, they did not want to hear about other solutions. All countries solved that problem, the Slovenes back in 1991 ", Leskovar was indignant. 4. What is referred to in Article 6 of the Law on Amendments to the Law on Lease of Apartments, which was repealed by the Constitutional Court? Article 6 defines that “on the day the Act enters into force, the right of the lessee and the protected tenant to protected rent and other rights ceases if he, his spouse, life partner or a member of the family household whom the lessee is obliged to support owns a habitable apartment or house. housing ”.