Ibn al-Qāsim reports that Mālik said: “The same ruling applies in our practice to livestock. Even if the cultivated land is wide-stretching and abundant so that its owners cannot possibly guard it, the judgment remains unchanged.
“No one ought to stop his neighbour from setting a beam into his wall, yet the judge does not compel him to grant that permission if he refuses. Ibn al-Muṭṭalib used to rule in our city that the neighbour could be compelled, and Ibn Ḥabīb favoured that view; but Mālik and all his companions agreed that when the owner of the wall authorises his neighbour for a fixed period, he may pull the wood out once that term has expired.
“Mālik also said: If a man lends his neighbour a place in his wall for the latter’s timber, and later becomes upset with him and wishes to remove it, he has no right to do so. Should a genuine need arise—such as having to raise the wall and build upon it because necessity presses him—then he may require the neighbour to remove the wood. But if he merely intends to sell the house and says, ‘Take out your beam,’ he has no such right. Likewise, when he did not specify a time-limit at the outset, he may not take the timber out unless some circumstance befalls him that obliges him to rebuild and heighten the wall.
“When two men share a wall and it collapses, and one of them wants to rebuild it together with his partner while the other refuses, there are two reports from Mālik. One states that the reluctant partner cannot be forced; the applicant is told, ‘Protect your property and build if you wish,’ and he may divide the width of the wall with his partner and build his own side. The other report is that the partner is ordered to rebuild with him and compelled to do so. Ibn ʿAbd al-Ḥakam said, ‘We prefer this second opinion.’
“If a man possesses a right of way across his neighbour’s land to reach his own property, and the landowner wishes to shift that path to another spot in the same estate and plant the former pathway, he may not do so without the consent of the one who holds the right of passage, whether or not the change would harm him.”