N.Y. Real Property Law § 339-h

Exclusive Unit Ownership: N.Y. Real Property Law § 339-h

N.Y. Real Property Law § 339-h establishes that each condominium unit owner shall be entitled to the exclusive ownership and possession of his unit.

Official text N.Y. Real Property Law § 339-h — New York

§ 339-h. Ownership of units. Each unit owner shall be entitled to the exclusive ownership and possession of his unit.

Text as published in the 2026 snapshot of the code.

Source: Vaquill Open US Law, compiled from official state publishers (huggingface.co), reproduced under license CC BY 4.0.

Read this provision at the official source →

What it actually says

One sentence: each unit owner shall be entitled to the exclusive ownership and possession of his unit. It is the shortest provision in New York's Condominium Act and the one that separates a condominium from a co-operative. A co-op shareholder holds shares and a proprietary lease from a corporation that owns the building; a condominium unit owner owns real property outright, and the board is not the owner's landlord.

The consequence that matters day to day is that the board's authority over the inside of a unit is authority to be found - in the declaration, in the by-laws, in this article - and not assumed. Section 339-i(5) gives the unit owners, acting through the board, an irrevocable right of access to each unit during reasonable hours to the extent necessary for the operation of the property or for emergency repairs to prevent damage to the common elements or to another unit; that right is expressly limited and expressly subject to reasonable rules protecting the privacy and security of units. Exclusive possession is the rule; access is the stated exception.

The sentence does not, however, tell you where the unit stops. What is unit and what is common element is fixed by the declaration under § 339-n, and the answer for terraces, windows, pipes behind a wall and the space above a ceiling is frequently not what an owner expects. Section 339-h says the unit is exclusively yours; it does not say what the unit is.

When it applies

  • A board asserts the right to control what happens inside a unit without pointing to any provision.
  • An owner disputes the board's claim that a terrace, balcony or window is common property.
  • Access to a unit is demanded for works that are not urgent.
  • A buyer wants to understand what condominium ownership gives that a co-op does not.
  • A board seeks to bar an owner from occupying the unit.

What this section does not say

  • It does not define the unit's boundaries. That comes from the declaration required by § 339-n.
  • It does not exempt an owner from the by-laws. Section 339-j requires compliance with the by-laws and the rules and regulations.
  • It does not bar all access. Section 339-i(5) gives the board an irrevocable access right for operation of the property and emergency repairs.
  • It does not apply to a co-operative apartment, where the relationship is corporation and shareholder-lessee rather than owner and board.
  • Exclusive ownership does not mean exemption from common charges - § 339-x says so expressly.

Worked examples

Invented situations, written to show how the wording bites. They are not real cases, not judgments and not precedent, and nothing here predicts what would happen in yours.

Illustrative example

A board tells an owner that her terrace is common property and that it will decide what may be kept on it. She has always understood the terrace to be part of what she bought.

How the wording applies

Each unit owner is entitled to the exclusive ownership and possession of his unit - but that sentence does not say what the unit is. Boundaries come from the declaration required by § 339-n, and the answer for terraces, windows, pipes behind walls and the space above a ceiling is frequently not what an owner expects. So it turns on the declaration rather than on the board's practice or the owner's assumption.

How the parties settled it

They read the declaration together, and where it makes the terrace a common element with exclusive use, the board agrees a written list of what may be kept there instead of deciding item by item.

Illustrative example

A board demands entry to an occupied unit on two days' notice for works that are not urgent, and tells the owner she has no right to refuse.

How the wording applies

Exclusive possession is the rule and access is the stated exception: § 339-i(5) gives an irrevocable right of access during reasonable hours to the extent necessary for the operation of the property or for emergency repairs to prevent damage, subject to reasonable rules protecting the privacy and security of units. So it turns on whether these works fall within that purpose, and then on the hours proposed.

How the parties settled it

They agree a schedule with a week's notice, a named contractor, working hours that suit the household, and the owner or her agent present throughout.

Illustrative example

A buyer choosing between a condominium and a co-op is told by an agent that the two come to much the same thing once a board is involved.

How the wording applies

They do not. A co-op shareholder holds shares and a proprietary lease from a corporation that owns the building; a condominium unit owner owns real property outright and the board is not the owner's landlord. What follows practically is that a board's authority over the inside of a unit has to be found in the declaration, the by-laws or this article rather than assumed. Exclusive ownership does not, though, mean exemption from common charges - § 339-x says so in terms.

How the parties settled it

The buyer asks for the declaration, the by-laws and two years of minutes before making an offer on either, and the seller agrees to provide them.

Related sections

N.Y. Real Property Law § 339-i Condo Board Access Rights | N.Y. Real Property Law § 339-i N.Y. Real Property Law § 339-k Condo alteration consent: N.Y. Real Property Law § 339-k N.Y. Real Property Law § 339-x RPL § 339-x: you cannot escape common charges by not using the building N.Y. Real Property Law § 339-m RPL § 339-m: how condominium common charges are apportioned

That's the law. Now let's settle your problem.

Say what is happening. A neutral mediator hears your side and the other party's, and walks you both to a written agreement. In the advanced settings you can ask for the decision to be reasoned on the New York Consolidated Laws.

This is with

Or open a session directly and invite the other party.

We copy this text from the official publisher and re-check it against that source on every page load, but we cannot guarantee it is complete, current or free of error, and we accept no liability for any reliance on it. An amendment can take effect before a consolidation catches up. The publisher's own copy is linked below; where the two differ, it is the official one that counts.

This page reproduces the text of N.Y. Real Property Law § 339-h in force at the date shown and explains it in general terms. It is not legal advice and takes no account of the circumstances of your case, which can change the answer completely. For a live dispute, for limitation periods, and before taking any step in court, consult a qualified lawyer in New York.

← All New York law pages