THE JERUSALEM INSTITUTE OF JEWISH LAW
Rabbi Emanuel Quint, Dean

Lesson # 365 • Neighbors, Rights and Responsibilities (part three)
We again continue with the topic that so many neighbors get involved in. Your neighbor wants to make changes to the structure of his house. In many cases this will have impact on you the neighbor. In this lesson we shall discuss the proposed changes your neighbor wants to make to his premises. What are your rights as the contiguous (bordering) neighbor?

There is a general principle that no member of a jointly owned courtyard A has the right to add openings or to change the configurations of the openings into the courtyard. He must continue to maintain the openings of the house as he purchased it or inherited it or built it. If Shimon originally obtained permission from Reuven to build a house with several doors and he built a house with only one door, he may not thereafter open new doors in the house. Assume that Reuven and Shimon share a common courtyard, courtyard A, and their houses face the courtyard and have openings into the courtyard. Shimon may not make any changes in his own structure. For if Shimon will make a change in the structure it may result in Shimon now being able to overview Reuven when he uses the courtyard or may result in Shimon being able to overview into Reuven’s house (or it may result in a greater number of persons who make use of courtyard A).

Reuven may sue Shimon to prevent him from making such changes. If Shimon’s old house was razed or collapsed, Shimon may replace it with a new house even after a long time provided that the number of openings and configuration of the openings is not changed in such a manner as to adversely affect Reuven from what it was in the old house. Since this right is reserved to Shimon, Reuven should act accordingly. Reuven should realize that Shimon has the potential of rebuilding his house and then might be able to overview Reuven if Reuven makes any changes in his use of his property, relying on the fact that Shimon’s structure collapsed. Shimon has openings in a wall that is on the boundary line between Shimon and Reuven. Reuven wishes to build on his land and block Shimon’s window. Knowing that if Shimon protests in Beit Din, Reuven will be enjoined from blocking the window, Reuven offers to move Shimon’s window to another part of the wall, all at Reuven’s expense. Shimon objects that in moving the window Reuven may possibly weaken the wall. Reuven offers to pay for the replacing of the wall and to pay for relocating Shimon during the time that the wall is being rebuilt. Shimon has the legal right to refuse Reuven’s offer. However, Shulchan Aruch states that there is no bother involved to Shimon, and no need to move out of the house, and the wall will not be weakened, Beit Din, under its general equity powers, can compel Shimon to permit Reuven to move Shimon’s window.

Reuven has a wall belonging solely to him on his side of the boundary line, which wall protects Shimon from Reuven’s overviewing. If the necessity arises, Reuven may take down the wall provided he offers to join with Shimon in building another wall, which expense shall be borne equally by both of them. The reason for replacing the wall is to prevent each person from overviewing the other. Shimon may not enlarge the size of his doors or windows that face Reuven’s courtyard or their common courtyard A. The reason is that Reuven can plead that he has gotten used to coping with the current openings and does his activities in his courtyard or in courtyard A in such a manner that Shimon cannot see them. This he will no longer be able to do if Shimon enlarges his openings and he will be damaged by Shimon’s overviewing. However, he may diminish the size of any opening but only in the same place where there was the larger opening. If Shimon had an open side to his structure facing Reuven, he may now build a wall there with a small window. This diminishes the opportunity for Shimon to overview Reuven. Shimon may not substitute two small openings that overview Reuven’s property for one large opening that overviews it even if together they are the same size as the large opening and are located in the same place where the large opening was located. Reuven can plead that Shimon was less likely to keep open one large opening than one small opening. Thus Shimon may constantly keep open one of the two new openings and thus there will be more times when there will be openings overviewing Reuven.

Shimon may substitute one large opening for two small openings, if it is not larger than the two smaller openings combined and is located in the same space where the two smaller openings were located. Shimon may not change the location of the window from one part of the wall to another part of the wall, whether to make them higher or lower, even if Shimon pleads that the will make a smaller window in another part of the wall to substitute for the larger window.

Door openings
If Shimon obtains permission from Reuven by deed or by kinyan to build a door into courtyard A, he may do so provided that he does not build his door directly opposite the door of Shimon, but at least slightly removed from being directly opposite, so as to avoid overviewing as much as possible. If Reuven gives Shimon permission by deed or by kinyan to build his door directly opposite Reuven’s door, he may do so. But Shimon cannot obtain a presumption by maintaining a newly build door opposite Reuven’s door even after many years; Reuven may at any time, even after many years, demand that Shimon block up the door that is opposite Reuven’s door which was there first. The reason is that Reuven may plead that he tried do get used to the idea of Shimon’s door facing his and Shimon overviewing him; he has come to realize that he cannot abide such an ordeal. Or Reuven may plead that he never bothered to protest since everyone including Reuven knows that one cannot obtain a presumption of maintaining a door directly opposite the door of another person. If Reuven and Shimon simultaneously decide to build new doors facing each other, and if they cannot agree, then Beit Din shall examine the situation to see if one of the parties can benefit and the other party not suffer any damage. If such a situation exists, Beit Din should award the right to build the door to the party who will benefit, without causing damage to the other party. However, if such situation does not exist, Beit Din should try for a compromise.

Shimon may build a door in his residential dwelling facing the public street at any time that he wishes, even if it directly faces a door of Reuven, who resides on the opposite side of the street. Shimon may change the configuration of his openings into the public street and enlarge them and add to them.

The subject matter of this lesson is more fully discussed In Volume 5, Chapter 154 of A Restatement of Rabbinic Civil Law by Emanuel Quint. Copies of all volumes can be purchased at local Judaica bookstores. Questions to quint@inter.net.il

[The Parshat Bo Homepage]
[The TORAH tidbits Homepage] [How to use TORAH tidbits]
[About The OU/NCSY Israel Center] [About TORAH tidbits]
[www.ou.org]