#28932
imported_dech
Blocked

        This particular case is probably all over but why would anyone think that a floor covering (parquetry) has anything to do with common property (my understanding being that parquetry is adhered to the floor) – even if the damage was caused by a failing in the common property.  It seems to be established that where a water leak from common property pipes causing paint damage to the ceiling below the paint damage is not covered by the OC. 

        In the case above it appears to have been established that the damage was not caused by any common prop. failure and that the parquetry was adhered to something i.e. the actual common property floor and thus should have the same status as originally laid carpet or original paint on walls.