On 12 August 2026 Spain experienced a total solar eclipse. And one detail changed everything for homeowners associations: according to Spain’s National Geographic Institute (IGN), the Sun was extremely low over the horizon during totality — around 12 degrees in A Coruña, 8 in Burgos and barely 2 in Palma de Mallorca. In plain terms: from the street or from an east-facing balcony you would see nothing. The good spot in the building was the roof terrace.
And that is where the problem starts. Going up to the community roof terrace is not an automatic right of every owner: the fact that the roof is a common element does not mean every neighbour may access it whenever they wish. Let us look, with the law in front of us, at who decides, by what majority, whether there is time to call a meeting at short notice, and who is liable if someone falls.
The roof terrace is a common element, unless the deed says otherwise
The starting point is article 396 of the Spanish Civil Code, which lists the building’s common elements and expressly names, among them, «the ground, air space, foundations and roofs». The building’s roof — that is, the roof terrace — is by default a common element. Article 3.b of the Horizontal Property Law (LPH) completes the picture: each flat carries with it «co-ownership, together with the other owners of flats or premises, of the remaining common elements, appurtenances and services».
There is one important exception worth checking before answering any neighbour: article 3.a recognises the owner’s right over «the appurtenances expressly designated in the deed, even if they are located outside the delimited space». If the deed of horizontal division assigns the roof terrace as an appurtenance or for the private use of the top-floor flat, the conversation ends there: it is not a community space and nobody goes up without that owner’s permission.
Co-ownership is not the same as free access
Here lies the misunderstanding behind most of the calls a manager gets. Being a co-owner of the roof terrace does not grant an unconditional right to go up. Nowhere does the LPH recognise a «right of access» to common elements independently of their intended purpose. What it does say, in article 9.1.a, is that each owner is obliged to «respect the general installations of the community and other common elements (…) making appropriate use of them and avoiding at all times causing damage or deterioration».
That is the key: appropriate use. And what is appropriate depends on the intended purpose of the space. A roof terrace fitted out as a solarium, drying area or communal viewpoint has a foreseen residential use. A technical roof housing only aerials, air-conditioning units, chimneys and panels has a different purpose, and access to it may be reserved for maintenance, repair and inspection work without infringing anyone’s rights.
Who decides whether you can go up to the community roof: the meeting, not the president
This is the part most often confused. Article 14.d of the LPH gives the Owners’ Meeting, and nobody else, the power to «approve or amend the statutes and determine the rules of internal governance». And article 14.e entrusts it with «considering and deciding on all other matters of general interest to the community, agreeing the necessary or appropriate measures for the best common service».
The specific instrument for regulating this is the internal governance regulation of article 6, which exists precisely «to regulate the details of coexistence and the appropriate use of common services and property» and which, the law says, «shall also bind every owner so long as they are not amended in the manner provided for adopting resolutions on administration».
By what majority
Two things that are constantly mixed up need to be told apart here:
- Regulating use through internal governance rules: simple majority. As this is not one of the reinforced-majority cases of article 17, article 17.7 applies: «For the validity of all other resolutions, the vote of the majority of the total number of owners who in turn represent the majority of the participation quotas shall suffice». At second call, a majority of those attending representing more than half of the value of the quotas present is enough.
- Banning the use by writing it into the statutes: unanimity. If what is wanted is a statutory rule, article 17.6 requires «the unanimity of the total number of owners who in turn represent the total participation quotas» for resolutions involving the approval or amendment of the rules of the constitutive deed or of the statutes.
Once validly adopted, the resolution binds everyone: article 17.9 is literal — «resolutions validly adopted in accordance with the provisions of this article bind all owners». Including whoever voted against and whoever did not attend.
What the manager can do on their own
Less than many neighbours believe and more than many managers dare. Article 20.a entrusts them with «ensuring the good running of the building, its installations and services, and issuing to that end the appropriate warnings and admonitions to the owners», and 20.c allows them to arrange «the repairs and measures that prove urgent, immediately reporting them to the president». The president, for their part, holds the representation of the community under article 13.3.
In other words: the manager can warn, can apply rules that already exist and can adopt urgent conservation and safety measures. What they cannot do is create a new rule binding on everyone, because that power belongs to the meeting. If there is no prior rule about the roof terrace, the prudent course is to take it to a meeting and put it in writing.
Is there time to call a meeting at short notice? Yes
This is the myth that most often needs dismantling. Many people believe every meeting requires six days’ notice. False. Article 16.3 says exactly this:
«Notice for the annual ordinary Meeting shall be given at least six days in advance, and for extraordinary meetings, with whatever notice is possible so that it may come to the knowledge of all interested parties. The Meeting may validly convene even without the president’s notice, provided that all the owners are present and so decide.»
The six days apply only to the annual ordinary meeting. For an extraordinary one, the law sets no numerical deadline: it requires whatever notice is possible for the announcement to reach all interested parties. With an event only days away, a community can call an extraordinary meeting and approve an access protocol perfectly in time, provided that notice is genuinely served on all owners in the manner of article 9.
And there is an even faster route: the universal meeting. If all the owners are present and so decide, the meeting is valid without any prior notice at all. In a small community, that is settled in an afternoon.
Who calls it? Article 16.1 provides that the meeting shall convene «on such other occasions as the president deems appropriate or as requested by one quarter of the owners, or by a number of them representing at least 25 per cent of the participation quotas». If the president does not see the issue, a quarter of the neighbours can force it.
A note on format: the LPH does not expressly regulate meetings held entirely by electronic means, although legal practice has been accepting them where identification and voting are guaranteed. We cover this in detail in this analysis of remote owners’ meetings. And whatever the format, the resolution must be recorded in the minutes, which under article 19.3 must be closed with the signatures of the president and the secretary at the end of the meeting or within the following ten calendar days.
If the roof terrace is locked
The roof being locked and the key held by the president or the manager is a common practice and, generally, a defensible one: it reflects the technical purpose of the space and the duty to conserve and keep the building safe. It is not an arbitrary decision if there is a real reason behind it, and there usually is.
What a neighbour must not do is force access or have copies of the key cut on their own initiative. Besides breaching article 9.1.a, they expose themselves to article 9.1.g, which requires owners to «exercise due diligence in the use of the property and in their relations with the other owners, and to answer to them for infringements committed and damage caused».
And if things get out of hand and the roof ends up turned into a party, article 7.2 comes into play, prohibiting owners and occupants from carrying out «activities prohibited in the statutes, harmful to the property, or contrary to the general provisions on annoying, unhealthy, noxious, dangerous or unlawful activities». The procedure has set steps: a demand from the president that the activity cease and, if the offender persists, authorisation from the meeting and a cessation action. A judgment upholding the claim may go so far as to deprive the offender of the right to use the dwelling for a period not exceeding three years.
What if an owner considers the ban abusive?
They have a route. Article 18.1 allows resolutions to be challenged where they are contrary to the law or to the statutes, seriously harmful to the community for the benefit of one or more owners, or where they seriously prejudice an owner who is under no obligation to bear it or have been adopted in abuse of rights. That said, article 18.2 limits who may do so: those who recorded their dissent at the meeting, those who were absent and those improperly deprived of their right to vote — and they must also be up to date with payments or deposit the debt. The deadline in 18.3 is three months, or one year if the resolution is contrary to the law or to the statutes.
Who is liable if someone falls
This is the question that really keeps a property manager awake, and it deserves a precise answer, without alarmism and without false reassurance.
There is no automatic liability on the community. The general rule is article 1902 of the Civil Code: «Anyone who by act or omission causes damage to another, with fault or negligence intervening, is obliged to repair the damage caused». Fault or negligence is required, and it must be proved. Someone falling does not in itself create an obligation to compensate.
That said, the scenario changes a great deal depending on what the community has done:
- An open roof terrace, without parapets or railings in proper condition and with no access control whatsoever. Here the community’s negligence is far easier to argue, because article 10.1.a of the LPH makes mandatory, without any prior resolution of the meeting, the works necessary for proper maintenance and compliance with the duty of conservation, «including in all cases those necessary to satisfy the basic requirements of safety, habitability and universal accessibility».
- A locked roof terrace, with an express and communicated rule, and someone forces access. The community’s position is significantly better, and the injured party’s own conduct weighs in the balance.
- Access authorised under a reasonable, documented protocol. This is the middle ground and, in practice, the most defensible one when the community wants to allow the use.
One nuance that avoids trouble: article 17.4 establishes that «no owner may demand new installations, services or improvements not required for the proper conservation, habitability, safety and accessibility of the property». Nobody can force the community to install a new railing in order to watch an eclipse. But beware of the flip side: if that protection was necessary for the safety of the property, then it is no longer an optional improvement but a mandatory work under article 10.1.a.
Beforehand it is also worth reviewing the community’s insurance policy and confirming with the broker that public liability covers the use of the roof by the owners. It is a five-minute call that can save a year of litigation.
A practical protocol for opening the roof
If the community decides to open the roof terrace, this is what the resolution should carry. None of it is a legal requirement in itself, but taken together it is the best evidence of diligence a community can have if something goes wrong:
- A maximum capacity consistent with the actual surface area and the condition of the perimeter parapet.
- A closed time window. Totality occurred late in the afternoon, very close to sunset, and lasted little more than a minute and a half depending on the city (76 seconds in A Coruña, 104 in Burgos). It is worth checking the exact time for the municipality on the IGN website and opening only a bounded window. There is no need to keep the roof open all day.
- One person responsible, holding the key, present throughout, who opens and closes.
- Minors accompanied by a responsible adult, without exception.
- No chairs, ladders, stools or anything else that would allow someone to lean out over the parapet. This is the real risk: with the Sun between 2 and 12 degrees above the horizon, everyone crowds onto the western edge.
- Technical areas marked off and access forbidden to machinery, skylights, roof lights and panels. A roof light will not take a person’s weight.
- No alcohol and no barbecues. It sounds obvious until it is not put in writing.
- A record of who goes up, even if it is a paper list at the entrance.
- Written notice to all owners setting out the rules, before the day. Without this, the protocol is worthless.
And one recommendation that is not legal but does matter: the IGN insists on using only eclipse glasses certified to EN ISO 12312-2:2015 with CE marking, and expressly rules out homemade filters such as X-ray film, CDs, smoked glass, sunglasses or welder’s goggles. During the partial phases, looking at the Sun without an approved filter causes irreversible eye damage. It is worth including in the notice to residents.
The awkward part: communicating in time
The real obstacle is rarely legal, it is logistical. Calling an extraordinary meeting in August, with half the community on holiday, proving that notice reached everyone, collecting the vote and notifying the resolution before the day is a race against the clock if it is done with paper in letterboxes and scattered phone calls.
It is exactly the kind of situation in which having the channel of communication with residents already set up makes the difference: notice sent and with proof of receipt, rules visible to everyone in the same place, minutes accessible from a phone and no doubt about who found out and who did not. When communication with the community is in order, an unforeseen event like this is resolved in hours instead of days.
Frequently asked questions
Can I go up to my building’s roof terrace to watch an eclipse?
It depends on three things: whether the roof is a common element or a private appurtenance under the constitutive deed, what its intended purpose is (communal terrace or technical roof), and what the statutes and internal governance rules say. Being a co-owner does not in itself grant a right of free access. If it is locked, ask the president or the manager for authorisation and do not force your way in.
Can the community bar me from a common element?
It can regulate its use through internal governance rules approved at a meeting by simple majority (arts. 6, 14.d and 17.7 LPH), and those rules bind all owners (art. 17.9). If the restriction responds to safety or conservation reasons, it is hard to challenge. If an owner considers it abusive, they may challenge it in the cases and within the deadlines of article 18.
Is there time to call an extraordinary meeting at a few days’ notice?
Yes. Article 16.3 LPH sets six days’ notice only for the annual ordinary meeting. For extraordinary meetings it requires whatever notice is «possible so that it may come to the knowledge of all interested parties», with no numerical deadline. In addition, if all the owners are present and so decide, the meeting is valid without prior notice.
Who pays if a neighbour falls from the roof?
There is no automatic liability. Article 1902 of the Civil Code applies, which requires fault or negligence. The community’s position is much worse if it opened a space without the basic safety conditions that article 10.1.a of the LPH obliges it to maintain, and better if there was an express, communicated and reasonable rule. It is worth reviewing the public liability cover of the policy beforehand.
What if the roof terrace belongs to the top-floor flat?
If the constitutive deed configures it as a private appurtenance of a dwelling (art. 3.a LPH), it is not a communal space and the other residents cannot access it without that owner’s permission. The first step is always to read the deed of horizontal division, not to assume.
Can the manager authorise access on their own?
They can apply rules that already exist, issue warnings (art. 20.a) and adopt urgent conservation measures (art. 20.c). What they cannot do is create a new rule binding on all owners: determining the internal governance rules is the exclusive competence of the meeting (art. 14.d).
Do you need to call an emergency meeting this week? With FixrOS, the notice reaches every owner with proof of receipt, the community’s rules are always in plain sight and the minutes are accessible from a phone as soon as they are closed. Request a free 30-minute demo and stop chasing residents on WhatsApp.