Article 9.1 d) of the Horizontal Property Law, imposes as one of the obligations of the owners to allow entry into their flat or premises in order to proceed with the revision or repair of common elements, or even for the installation of new ones.

This obligation, according to the ruling of the AP of Salamanca 9-3-2003, “can not only be imposed when the repair or revision of such common elements cannot be carried out by other means, but also when, even if there are other means to carry out the repair of the common elements, they are technically very complex or disproportionately costly in terms of the size of the repair”.

For its part, the Court of Appeal of Las Palmas, in its judgement of 27-5-2005, states that the obligation to allow entry into the flat or premises is not only the obligation of the owner, but also of whoever inhabits the property: “a rational interpretation of the precept [ art. 9.1 of the LPH ], as far as authorisation of entry is concerned in section d), obliges those who inhabit the property to be included, regardless of the title under which they do so, even if they are not the owner. This is the criteria maintained by various Provincial Courts”.

Regarding the scope of this obligation, the Madrid Provincial Court, in its ruling of 3-11-2004, states that since it is necessary to enter the home, the owner cannot refuse on the grounds of the right to inviolability of the home as enshrined in the Constitution: “… being necessary to enter the home of the defendants-appellants for the completion of works agreed and approved at the Meeting (…) the refusal to allow access to their home for the completion of the works, based on the inviolability of their home, as such a right recognised in our Constitution, cannot succeed (…) insofar as our Constitution does not protect the anti-social or abusive use of the right…”. In case the owner refuse it will be necessary a court order.

With regard to the damages caused to the community as a consequence of non-compliance with this obligation, the owner who incurs in it could be condemned to repair the damage caused to the community of owners (Judgement of the Barcelona Provincial Court 2-7-2007) or to pay the increase in the cost of a work due to the delay caused by having obstructed it (Judgement of the Barcelona Provincial Court 26-2-2003).

Finally, it should be pointed out that in cases of urgency, such as water leaks, in which the owner refuses to comply with this obligation, the community could even request the Duty Court to allow entry into the flat by means of an order when there is damage that does not allow waiting until a civil procedure.