When determining the value of a property, we must consider many factors. Among many other things, we cannot ignore such features as the view from the property (the panorama) or the natural lighting of the rooms. It is clear that the sunset over Lake Balaton that opens up before us from our window has a lot to offer the property, but it is often not clear what we need to pay attention to in return during construction, so as not to be caught in the crossfire of the demands of angry neighbors.
What does the right of panorama mean? Hungarian legislation does not mention the “right of panorama” at all, as this concept has been developed and filled with content by the judicial practice of recent decades.
The right of panorama is based on an extremely general provision. According to the Civil Code, the owner is obliged to refrain from any behavior when using the property that would unnecessarily disturb others, especially neighbors, or endanger the exercise of their rights. However, the provision has already left the boundaries of “disturbance” and “endangerment” to the courts.
The owner of a property therefore has the right to the view from his property, or to prevent his neighbors from seeing into the closed parts of the property. However, it is important that in addition to the advantages, there are also limitations: the property may not impair the view, insight and sunlight from nearby properties. For example, an investor may not build in such a way that instead of the imposing panorama of the city, the neighbors will only see a firewall after the construction is completed.
Liability can be established even with a permit – The real special feature of the right of view is its deceptive, slightly insidious nature: many real estate developers do not even take this issue into account in advance, only when the problem has already occurred. This is partly understandable, as the idea that if the investor has a legally binding building permit and the construction complies with the building permit, it is carried out in compliance with the relevant legislation, which has also been stamped by the authority.
However, judicial practice sees this differently: construction in accordance with the building permit does not exclude the builder’s liability for damages.
In such a case – regardless of legal construction – the builder must pay compensation to the neighbors if the new building results in the loss of views or sunlight.
How can the risk be reduced? It is important that the investor pays attention to the characteristics of the surrounding buildings and the environment of the new property from the very beginning. It is worth assessing whether there is a panorama at all near the new building or whether it is a densely built-up area; whether the construction is actually unnecessarily disturbing our neighbors, or whether the disturbance could be significantly reduced with some redesign.
A question of proof as to what constitutes unnecessary disturbance – If a more thorough examination of the environment of the new property was omitted during the planning, there is no need to panic: an emerging claim under neighbor’s law does not mean a pre-determined legal dispute. The neighbor who is claiming compensation has a serious burden of proof, as he must prove in court that the value of his property has decreased as a result of the unnecessary disturbance caused by the new building.
The key question is whether the investor violated the prohibition of unnecessary disturbance.
However, judicial practice is consistent in this regard that if the investor has created a building of a size and height that is otherwise customary in the area and does not significantly deviate from the appearance of the settlement, then unnecessary disturbance cannot be established. The investor is therefore not obliged to put the interests of the neighbor before his own interests; it is sufficient if he chooses a construction method that takes into account the local characteristics of the built environment and does not cause significant disadvantages for the neighbors.
