of the tree extends into the airspace—for example, if a person has a tree in his house whose branches hang over his neighbour’s property—then this is in the airspace.

As for the ground, a person may have a tree in his house that is of a type which spreads along the ground, such as a watermelon plant, and one of its branches may extend onto his neighbour’s land. This is an encroachment upon the ground. There is also a third thing that may extend to the neighbour: the roots, which lie beneath the ground. Thus, there are now three matters: a branch upon the ground, a branch in the airspace, and roots beneath the ground.

As for a branch in the airspace or upon the ground, the owner of the branch must remove it if the owner of the land, who is his neighbour, demands this. If he says, “Remove this branch from my property,” then he must remove it.

If the owner of the tree says, “This branch benefits you: it provides shade, and you and your family can sit in its shade,” and the neighbour says, “I do not want this branch,” is the owner of the tree required to remove it?

The answer is: yes, he is required to do so.

If they reach an agreement that the fruit on this extending branch will be shared between them, the scholars said that this is valid.

Likewise, if it is upon the ground—that is, the branches spread across the ground—then the owner must remove it if the neighbour demands it.

It is understood from this discussion that the airspace belongs to the owner of the land up to the lowest heaven. Therefore, no one may construct a projecting balcony, or anything similar, over that land without his permission.