(a)Unless the governing documents specify a different percentage, the affirmative vote of members owning at least 67 percent of the separate interests in the common interest development shall be required before the board may grant exclusive use of any portion of the common area to a member.
(b)Subdivision (a) does not apply to the following
actions:
(1)A reconveyance of all or any portion of that common area to the subdivider to enable the continuation of development that is in substantial conformance with a detailed plan of phased development submitted to the Real Estate Commissioner with the application for a public report.
(2)Any grant of exclusive use that is in substantial conformance with a detailed plan of phased development submitted to the Real Estate Commissioner with the application for a public report or in accordance with the governing documents approved by the Real Estate Commissioner.
(3)Any grant of exclusive use that is for any of the following reasons:
(A)To eliminate or correct engineering errors in documents recorded with the county recorder or on file with a public
agency or utility company.
(B)To eliminate or correct encroachments due to errors in construction of any improvements.
(C)To permit changes in the plan of development submitted to the Real Estate Commissioner in circumstances where the changes are the result of topography, obstruction, hardship, aesthetic considerations, or environmental conditions.
(D)To fulfill the requirement of a public agency.
(E)To transfer the burden of management and maintenance of any common area that is generally inaccessible and not of general use to the membership at large of the association.
(F)To accommodate a disability.
(G)To assign a
parking space, storage unit, or other amenity, that is designated in the declaration for assignment, but is not assigned by the declaration to a specific separate interest.
(H)To install and use an electric vehicle charging station in an owner’s garage or a designated parking space that meets the requirements of Section 4745, where the installation or use of the charging station requires reasonable access through, or across, the common area for utility lines or meters.
(I)To install and use an electric vehicle charging station through a license granted by an association under Section 4745.
(J)To install and use a solar energy system on the common area roof of a residence that meets the requirements of Sections 714, 714.1, and, if applicable, Section 4746.
(K)To comply with governing law.
(c)Any measure placed before the members requesting that the board grant exclusive use of any portion of the common area shall specify whether the association will receive any monetary consideration for the grant and whether the association or the transferee will be responsible for providing any insurance coverage for exclusive use of the common area.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
136
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1970–2025 · leading case:
Guardianship of Phillip B., 139 Cal. App. 3d 407 (Cal. Ct. App. 1983).
Guardianship of Phillip B., 139 Cal. App. 3d 407 (Cal. Ct. App. 1983).
· cites it 8× “” (Civ. Code, § 4600, subd. (c); see In re B.”
Michael U. v. Jamie B., 705 P.2d 362 (Cal. 1985).
· cites it 6× “(Civ. Code, § 4600, subd. (a); In re B.G., supra, 11 Cal.”
Michael H. v. Gerald D., 491 U.S. 110 (1989).
· cites it 2× “But if Michael were successful in being declared the father, other rights would follow most importantly, the right to be considered as the parent who should have custody, Cal. Civ. Code Ann. § 4600 (West 1983), a status which "embrace[s] the sum of parental rights with respect…”
In Re Reyna, 55 Cal. App. 3d 288 (Cal. Ct. App. 1976).
· cites it 5× “(Civ. Code, § 4600.) Statement Of The Case On April 14, 1975, David filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Kern County Superior Court seeking to obtain the custody of his child from the Kern County Welfare Department Adoption Agency.”
In Re Cheryl H., 153 Cal. App. 3d 1098 (Cal. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 3× “Civil Code section 4600 also applies to the dispositional phase of a dependency proceeding.”
Speelman v. Superior Court, 152 Cal. App. 3d 124 (Cal. Ct. App. 1983).
· cites it 6× “) Civil Code section 4600 now declares that custody should be awarded ‘To either parent according to the best interests of the child.”
Burchard v. Garay, 724 P.2d 486 (Cal. 1986).
· cites it 2× “(1) In deciding between competing parental claims to custody, the court must make an award "according to the best interests of the child" (Civ. Code, § 4600, subd. (b)). This test, established by statute, governs all custody proceedings.”
Curiale v. Reagan, 222 Cal. App. 3d 1597 (Cal. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 3× “) While Civil Code section 7015 confers standing upon any interested person to bring an action to determine the existence or not of a parent-child relationship, it has no application where, as here, it is undisputed defendant is the natural mother of the child.”
In Re Heather B., 9 Cal. App. 4th 535 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 2× “) Consequently, Civil Code section 4600 is not applicable.”
Dep't of Adoptions v. Daniel G., 68 Cal. App. 3d 146 (Cal. Ct. App. 1977).
· cites it 2× “Moreover, in construing even more recent legislation, the 1969 Family Law Act (Civ. Code, § 4600), our Supreme Court in In re B.”
Enrique M. v. Angelina V., 2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8108 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004).
“] The changed-circumstance rule is not a different test, devised to supplant the statutory test, but an adjunct to the best-interest test. It provides, in essence, that once it has been established that a particular custodial arrangement is in the best interests of the child,…”
— Cal. Civil Code § 4600(a) — 1 case
— Cal. Civil Code § 4600(c) — 2 cases
— Cal. Civil Code § 4600(d) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.