Installing an elevator affects lighting and ventilation. Lower-floor residents sue 58 neighbors for compensation of 48k yuan; first instance awards 3,920 yuan in damages.

In an older residential community in Chongqing, a resident surnamed Li of a lower-floor unit, citing that the installation of an elevator would affect the building’s sunlight and ventilation and that it would reduce the value of the property, filed a compensation claim against other property owners who agreed to and participated in the elevator installation.

After negotiations over compensation failed, Li sued 58 property owners, including Xiao and Xiang, who had contributed funds to construct the elevator, in court, seeking more than 48k yuan in damages.

This elevator has already been installed and put into use. Recently, a reporter learned from the China Judgments Online website that on March 26, the People’s Court of Beibei District, Chongqing announced the court’s first-instance judgment in this case.

The court held that the elevator installation indeed brought some adverse effects to Li’s property, such as reduced sunlight, reduced ventilation, and noise; therefore, the final judgment ordered Xiao, Xiang, and the other 58 owners to compensate Li 3,920 yuan.

Image: Elevators installed in older residential communities

Incident:

Elevator installation in an older residential community

Lower-floor residents sue for 48k yuan

After trial, it was determined that a certain residential building in Beibei District, Chongqing, did not have an elevator and belonged to an older residential community with a total of 71 household owners, including 41 households in Unit 1 and 30 households in Unit 2. On March 21, 2024, Xiao, Xiang, and other 51 owners, as owners whose shares of exclusive areas and whose number proportions of owners exceeded two-thirds, submitted an application for elevator installation and related materials to the Tiānshēng Subdistrict Office as the owners of Unit 1 and Unit 2 of Building No.

From June 7 to June 13, 2024, the subdistrict office publicized the plan for adding the elevator. On June 24 and 26 of the same year, the community residents’ committee organized mediation among the owners regarding the elevator addition, but no agreement was reached. On June 26, the building obtained the “Joint Review Opinion Form for Adding Elevators in Existing Residences,” and all relevant competent departments agreed to the installation of the elevator. After that, construction of the elevator installation project began. The elevator has now been completed and put into use.

Li, the owner of Apartment 2-1 in Unit 1, believed that because the building structure was old and the passageways and spacing were narrow, installing an elevator would affect the sunlight and ventilation of the lower-floor residence, expose indoor privacy, create safety hazards, and cause a significant depreciation in the property value, thereby harming the interests of lower-floor owners. Because negotiations over compensation failed, Li filed a lawsuit in court against 58 owners who had funded and built the elevator, requesting that the 58 defendants jointly compensate (provide reimbursement of) more than 48k yuan.

During the court proceedings, on October 27, 2025, the court organized both parties to conduct an on-site inspection at the elevator installation site and the premises involved in the case. During the litigation, the court organized mediation, but the two sides were unable to reach agreement.

Court:

Indeed brings adverse effects such as reduced sunlight

58 owners compensate 3,920 yuan

The court held that this case is a dispute over neighboring relationships arising from the installation of elevators in an older residential community. Installing elevators in older residential communities is an important measure to facilitate residents’ commuting, improve residential functions, enhance the quality of living, and meet the needs of social and economic development and population aging. It is an important people’s livelihood project.

In this case, among the 71 owners, 51 agreed to install the elevator, which complies with the provisions of Article 278, Paragraph 1, Item (7) of the Civil Code—“the modification or reconstruction of buildings and their supporting facilities shall be jointly decided by the owners”—and the provisions of Paragraph 2—“for matters jointly decided by the owners, voting shall be participated in by owners whose proportion of exclusive area is more than two-thirds and whose proportion of owners’ numbers is more than two-thirds. For approval, owners representing more than three-fourths of the exclusive area who participated in voting and owners representing more than three-fourths of the voting participants must agree,” as well as the requirements of the “Administrative Measures for the Addition of Elevators in Existing Residences in Chongqing,” under which the application materials were submitted; after publicity and mediation procedures, and after joint review by relevant departments, the elevator installation conduct was lawful.

The court further held that, in accordance with the principles of unity among neighbors, harmony, mutual assistance, and love, lower-floor owners should provide convenience for other higher-floor owners to have an elevator installed, and they should also accept certain limitations. Since the elevator has been installed and put into use, while it brings convenience to residents upstairs, it inevitably also brings some adverse impacts to lower-floor residents such as reduced ventilation, reduced sunlight, and noise. Therefore, corresponding to these adverse effects, appropriate compensation should be provided to lower-floor residents to protect their lawful rights and interests, so as to achieve unity and mutual assistance and build a harmonious neighborhood.

In this case, the plaintiff, Li, is one of the lower-floor owners. Due to factors such as the floor where the residence is located and the layout and structure of the home, natural lighting for the kitchen, bathroom, and storeroom is inherently limited. Because the elevator was additionally installed, a corridor bridge was added, which further restricted the plaintiff’s light source. In addition, above the windows of the bathroom and storeroom, there are horizontal beams connected to the elevator corridor bridge. Although these are not the plaintiff’s main living areas, considering that the elevator installation indeed brings adverse impacts such as reduced sunlight, reduced ventilation, and noise, the court, at its discretion, determined to grant the plaintiff a compensation of 4,080 yuan. The compensation shall be borne by the 51 owners, including Xiao and Xiang, who agreed to the elevator installation and benefited from it, on a per-household basis.

Because the plaintiff withdrew the lawsuit against the owners of two units before trial, the shares borne by those two owners should be deducted. Therefore, in this case, the 58 defendants should compensate the plaintiff 3,920 yuan in total, with each household calculated at 80 yuan. As for the plaintiff’s claim that the property value depreciated due to the elevator installation, up to the conclusion of the arguments in the first-instance hearing, no evidence had been submitted to prove the claim, and the court did not support it. In summary, the court ruled that Xiao, Xiang, and the other 58 defendants shall compensate the plaintiff Li 3,920 yuan.

Reporter Jiang Long from Hongxing News

Edited by Guo Yu

Reviewed by Feng Lingling