What are the precise criteria for making a place a legal residence for a person in Denmark? I would like to know the legal requirements for a dwelling to be considered legal and fit for registering as a residence with the government, in Denmark. I would prefer a complete, clear checklist, if possible. For example: Is there a specific size that the space must be, per person? How might this affect things like tiny homes, or a family member sleeping in a small family apartment’s couch, or a spouse spending lots of time with you even though the room is a small single, or a bunch of people packing in to one apartment to save money? I feel like there is probably some law that you can’t have a certain number of people in one room, but I wonder how that affects someone who genuinely wants to live in a tiny, tiny home, like a little shack/mini-cottage, basically. In order for it to have an address, if it were somewhere rural, would it be mandatory to be connected to physical roads, and then apply for a street address with the local government, who approve it? In other words, how much or little freedom do you have to create a new address somewhere - i.e., buying a cheap, empty piece of land in a remote area, and simply stating that this is your residence on paper, even if there’s no house there, and no official street name. I know that situation would be turned out, but when does it cross the threshold into permissible? Can one normal residential property, like a house, choose to split their sidewalk space in half, and have a second address and mailbox, for maybe someone they sublet to, who now technically lives at a different address, of their own? Also, I would appreciate hearing the distinction between illegal and enforced, illegal but less/not enforced, and legal. Thank you.
In practice, the legal requirements for a dwelling to be considered legal and fit for registering as a residence with the government in Denmark are often enforced by the local municipalities, which have the power to interpret and apply the laws and statutes according to their specific circumstances and needs. The checklist provided below is based on the general principles and guidelines set out in the relevant legislation and regulations, but it may vary depending on the local context and the specific characteristics of each dwelling. The Danish Building Act (Byggeloven): The Danish Building Act sets out the basic requirements for all buildings in Denmark, including dwellings. It defines the minimum requirements for size, health, safety, and location, and provides guidelines for construction, renovation, and demolition. The act is constantly updated to reflect new building technologies and changes in society's needs and expectations. The Danish Water Supply Act (Vandforsyningsloven): The Danish Water Supply Act sets out the requirements for the quality and safety of drinking water, as well as the responsibilities of the water supply companies and the consumers. The act ensures that all buildings have access to clean and safe drinking water and that the drainage system does not cause pollution or health hazards. The Danish Wastewater Act (Spildevandsloven): The Danish Wastewater Act regulates the disposal of sewage and other wastewater, and sets out the requirements for the treatment and discharge of wastewater. The act ensures that all buildings have proper drainage and that the environment is protected from pollution. The Danish Planning Act (Planloven): The Danish Planning Act sets out the guidelines for land use planning, including the designation of residential zones and the approval of building permits. The act ensures that all buildings are located in appropriate areas and that the surrounding environment is protected from inappropriate development. The Danish Rent Act (Lejeloven): The Danish Rent Act regulates the relationship between landlords and tenants, including the rent level, the notice periods, and the rights and obligations of both parties. The act ensures that all dwellings are rented out fairly and that the tenants have adequate housing standards. The following laws seem to be relevant when we start considering applying them to your conditional checklist: Size Occupancy Problem There is no minimum size requirement for a dwelling in Denmark, but there are regulations that specify how much space is required per person. The Danish Building Regulations specify that a dwelling must have a minimum floor area of 20 square meters per person. However, this does not necessarily apply to tiny homes or other non-traditional forms of housing, as long as they meet the minimum space requirements and other safety and health standards. The maximum number of occupants allowed in a dwelling is determined by its size, layout, and facilities, as well as the health and safety requirements set out in the Building Act and other regulations. Overcrowding is not permitted. Health Care Facility The Danish Water Supply Act sets out the requirements for the quality and safety of drinking water, as well as the responsibilities of the water supply companies and the consumers. The act ensures that all buildings have access to clean and safe drinking water and that the drainage system does not cause pollution or health hazards. This act deals with land property too. The dwelling must have adequate access to emergency services, such as fire, police, and ambulance. Enforced by this, residence must have it. The water supply and drainage system must meet the requirements set out in the Danish Water Supply Act (Vandforsyningsloven) and the Danish Wastewater Act (Spildevandsloven) in residence. Legal and enforced If a dwelling does not meet the legal requirements for size, health, safety, or location, it is considered illegal and can be subject to fines, demolition, or other enforcement measures by the local municipality or the Building Appeals Board (Huslejenævnet). Illegal dwellings are those that are not approved for residential use, or that have been altered without the necessary permits and inspections. The local municipality has the authority to enforce the Building Act and other relevant legislation and regulations. Permits and approvals: Depending on the specific circumstances, a dwelling in Denmark may require various permits and approvals from local authorities, such as planning permission or building permits. There might be many more laws, bindings, and promises to make, but these are compulsion with some relaxation to above situations. The question examples and requirements deal to land reforms, and health-care facility.
You understand the business of landlording before you get started. You don't landlord for the purpose of evicting someone. You landlord for the purpose of exchanging keys for a duration for money, specifically by creating a leasehold estate that you sell to your tenant. Your tenant has the leasehold, you don't have the money, in part because it sounds like you didn't collect any before you handed over the keys or confirm your tenants' ability and history of paying. You now want to nullify the leasehold. In general this is the eviction you ask about. You are now reliant on a court in your jurisdiction to enforce the contract law with respect to the lease language and prevailing local ordinances. I cannot speak specifically to NY courts but they have a reputation as tenant friendly so you need to demonstrate your professional approach and locally required paperwork such as a certificate of occupancy, business license, etc. All lined up to make it easy for a judge to agree with you. You have an uphill battle. Turning off utilities (as mentioned in another post of yours) is not a professional move and will bias many judges against you. No certificate of occupancy may mean your original lease contract created a leasehold contrary to a public policy of NY which could put a judge in a bind if they found your case compelling. If a competent lawyer would cost $15k then it sounds like it might be cheapest to offer the tenant a couple thousand for the keys and a signed release to walk away&ndash;spend a couple hundred on the lawyer for this. Do not give them the money until they are out and give you the keys. This is called cash for keys.
You have two questions here. A search by the government must be reasonable, under the 4th Amendment, meaning that a warrant is required or exigent circumstances must exist. Simple entering (without searching) is governed by Civil Code 1954. The law governing residential rentals is not explicit, because a a dormitory might be considered not to be a &quot;residential dwelling unit&quot;. Some states explicitly exclude university dormitories, but that seems not to be the case in CA. There are some specific exclusions where dormitories are excluded (such as 1946.2 regarding termination), so the lack of an exclusion for dormitories can't follow from an assumption that a dormitory is not a residential dwelling unit. Clearly, a normal apartment that happens to be owned by the university and is rented out to students (as exist in many universities) clearly is an ordinary rental. So it seems that a dormitory is not legally exempted from 1954: they can only enter with permission or in specific circumstances.
Yes; While contracts can be made in written and oral form bigger acquisitions normally are in written form. Also consider this: They can't prove that they told you that the balcony is not usable. Thats a big negative in buying a property and they would need to have it documented. If they still refuse consider seeking professional help. In my country lawyers offer "fast help" that isn't legally binding but costs you only 10$ and helps you finding out if your case has any possibility to get accepted/if you're right. EDIT: Regarding the reservation fee: You can dismiss that. You didn't reserved that object, you reserved a house with balcony.
There are certain requirements of Statehood according to the Montevideo Convention on Statehood of 1933, which is just a codification of international customary law: a permanent population; a defined territory; government; and capacity to enter into relations with the other states. Is it "legal" to buy a piece of land and claim it to be another country than before(either inventing a new one or migrating it to an already existing one)? According to international law, it is. Sure. But just because you say something is the case, doesn't mean it is. Always. Sometimes it is. But for present purposes, let's say that if you found an uninhabited island and said that you were a country, that wouldn't be the case - nor if you bought it from a man living on it. If you found some land that belonged to another country and decided to claim it as that of an existing country, then it would depend on the specific circumstances. That's exactly what happened to the Krim island in the Ukraine(now Russia maybe?), right? I don't think so. As far as I know, the annexation of territory isn't considered sale. In any case, the ownership of this land is still under dispute. So, if it's possible without the influence of these international institutions, trying this in an area with their influence would be easier, right? If trying this means declaring some land you have purchased to be a new sovereign state Nope. You probably still don't meet the requirements for statehood. If trying this means the acquisition of some land by an existing sovereign state Maybe. Probably not. The Montevideo Convention requires that statehood not be gained through force; while member states' interests may be greater where they are more invested, the requirements for acquisition of territory are the same no matter where you are. What would prevent me from creating my own nation? Money, defensibility, recognition, the fact that you probably don't own any land that you "buy" (depending on the jurisdiction and real estate system), the fact that you generally can't unilaterally declare yourself a sovereign state.
Yes 15 USC 1501, which is part of the Lanham Act, the basic US trademark law, provides in subsection (a)(2) that: (2) The application [for registration of a trademark] shall include specification of the applicant’s domicile and citizenship, the date of the applicant’s first use of the mark, the date of the applicant’s first use of the mark in commerce, the goods in connection with which the mark is used, and a drawing of the mark. This clearly implies that the applicant may have a citizenship other than US, or else ther ewould be nbo point in specifying the citizenship in the application. subsection (e) of the same section provides, in relevant part: If the applicant is not domiciled in the United States the applicant may designate, by a document filed in the United States Patent and Trademark Office, the name and address of a person resident in the United States on whom may be served notices or process in proceedings affecting the mark. This makes it cleat that an applicant need not be resident in the US., 15 USC 1141a provides that: (a) In general The owner of a basic application pending before the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or the owner of a basic registration granted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office may file an international application by submitting to the United States Patent and Trademark Office a written application in such form, together with such fees, as may be prescribed by the Director. (b) Qualified owners: A qualified owner, under subsection (a), shall— (b)(1) be a national of the United States; (b)(2) be domiciled in the United States; or (b)(3) have a real and effective industrial or commercial establishment in the United States. 1141a (b2) and (b)(3) make it clear that an applicant need not be a national (citizen) of the US. The USPTO's page &quot;Trademark FAQs&quot; lists under the heading &quot;General - Trademark Help - Getting Started - Other&quot; the following Q&amp;A: Must I be a U.S. citizen to obtain a federal registration? No. However, your citizenship must be provided in the application. If you have dual citizenship, then you must indicate which citizenship will be printed on the certificate of registration.
I don't know about that particular case, but you are basically right: In Switzerland, if you want to apply for citizenship, you apply for it in the municipality first. Everybody having the citizenship of the municipality has the swiss citizenship as well. In theory, the canton and the state also have something to say, but that's irrelevant for most applications. This has historic reasons, but going into the details is beyond the scope of this question. Fact is, that every municipality has its own rules, about when and how applications are handled. This has been unified a bit in recent years, but some things still differ. That is for instance, how many years you need to have lived there or who decides your application. There were municipalities (actually most) where the final decision was made using a public vote. This practice was declared illegal by the federal court some years ago, because becoming a citizen is a formal governmental act, and as such a reason needs to be given for turning an application down. This is inherently impossible with a vote. Since that law decision, most municipalities have shifted the responsibility to a committee for citizenship applications. The public can still bring in arguments, but they need to be justified (ie. if somebody knows about the applicant being a wanted criminal somewhere). Consequently, you can now call for a court to check whether the given reasoning is correct and just, if you are turned down.
Yes. Art 13 requires you to provide “the identity and the contact details of the controller”. You are the data controller. Your name and address are necessary to establish your identity. Using AdSense means you're offering an internet society service commercially. In that case, there's also probably some EU fair competition directive that was implemented in your countries national law and will provide equivalent requirements. For example, my country Germany has a far-reaching Impressumspflicht. Not sure if this is the most relevant EU law, but Art 22 of Directive 2006/123 requires that your country passed laws to ensure that you make available “the name of the provider, his legal status and form, the geographic address at which he is established and details enabling him to be contacted rapidly and communicated with directly and, as the case may be, by electronic means”. I think you would be in scope of this directive since you're acting commercially. This legally mandated self-doxxing is unfortunate for private bloggers, but it's also essential for making it possible to enforce data subject rights: if you were to violate someone's privacy rights, how could they sue you if they don't know where to serve you with a lawsuit? However, all things are a balancing act. These requirements are not intended to limit freedom of expression. If you're just trying to communicate something to the public without jeopardizing your anonymity, then paradoxically social media services can be more attractive.