Pavlova received an inheritance from her aunt - a one-room apartment. Due to the fact that Pavlova, her husband and child lived in a four-room apartment, which they owned by right of ownership, Pavlova, who was engaged in individual entrepreneurial activity, decided to use the apartment she received for making clothes. That is why she placed two sewing machines in this apartment, two seamstresses came to the apartment every day, with whom Pavlova entered into relevant agreements, and were engaged in the manufacture of clothes. Sewing work was carried out from 10 a.m. to 15 p.m. The neighbors who lived in the neighboring apartments did not object to this. However, citizen Enina, who lived in a one-room apartment a floor below, demanded that Pavlova stop this activity in the living room, as she was disturbed by noise from sewing machines. Pavlova refused to satisfy Enina’s requirements due to the fact that she is the owner of this apartment and therefore has the right to use her as she considers possible. In addition, work on the manufacture of clothes does not do any harm to the living quarters, Pavlov does not violate anyone´s rights and interests, and Enina simply cannot hear any noise from the sewing machines, since her apartment is located on the other floor and at the other end of the staircase. Enina turned to the lawyer with the following questions:
- which body should she apply to so that Pavlova is forbidden to carry out sewing work in the apartment;
- can Pavlova seize this apartment if she does not stop doing business there;
- Does it make any difference that Pavlova is not registered in this apartment (registered).
Prepare the answer to your questions.
After payment you will be available a link to the solution of this problem in the file of MS Word. It should be noted that the problem solutions put up for sale were successfully handed over in the period 2009-2019 and could be outdated. However, the general algorithm will always remain true.
No feedback yet