International Journal of Tourism, Travel and Hospitality Law is that the building or fraction where the establishment is to be installed has, from an administrative point of view, a "utilisation permit or other valid title" without reference to any specific use. This generic requirement that the building or fraction has a valid utilisation permit or title of use, irrespective of the use expressed therein (be it residential, commercial, industrial, etc.) signifies the legislator's intention to make it unnecessary to initiate a procedure to alter existing uses, the only concern being that the building or fraction where the activity is to be installed is legal, which is considered to be the case if it has a utilisation permit. In their comments to article 62 of RJUE8 , Fernanda Paula Oliveira, Maria José Castanheira Neves, Dulce Lopes and Fernanda Maçãs stated that: "However, the more recent trend has been for the legislator to establish legal compatibilities between activities of a different nature, making it clear that there is no need for alterations to the use permit whenever there is a desire to cumulate the exercise of distinct activities in the same location. This is the case with local accommodation, which is, by law, considered compatible with residential uses (the existence for the location of a valid use permit for the property being thus sufficient - paragraph a) of no. 1 of article 6 of Decreto-Lei no. 128/2014 of 29 August, as amended by Decreto-Lei no. 63/2015 of 23 April". If it is true that, until 2018, the legislator of RJAL only required that the building or autonomous fraction subject to exploitation in local accommodation had a use permit, without determining any specific use, with Lei 68/2018, article 6. 9. c) seems to indicate the requirement of at least an "adequate use", by allowing the territorially competent Mayor to oppose the prior communication in cases where there is "...lack of adequate authorization as per the use of the building". Did this rule enunciate intend to bring some novelty to the prior discussion that until then about the type of permit required for running the business? We do not believe so. Although the legislative technique can be criticised, we believe that the legislator still does not refer to any specific use for the establishments’ registration, namely in article 6.1. a), nor do we find any other indication that allows us to interpret the law as to search which use is considered "adequate"9 or even that it intends to determine any specific use. It seems that the legislator just wants to allow every use that fits to the very nature of the building without imposing any specific use as the "adequate" one. This adequacy will always have to be assessed according to 8 Oliveira et al, 2018, p. 477, in the same sense Teixeira de Sousa, 2020, p. 90. 9 In this sense, Teixeira de Sousa, 2020 p. 83.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==