Living Together as Neighbours: Rethinking the Reasonableness Standard in Nuisance Law Under the Constitution

The Covid-19 pandemic, with its concomitant "stay at home" catchphrase, has certainly made living together as neighbours in a constitutional dispensation more tangible. Conflicts between will inevitably increase, especially time when citizens from different social, cultural, customary or religious backgrounds and rights interests are restricted to the boundaries of their properties result pandemic. pandemic provided us impetus reflect upon notion "reasonableness" neighbour law, particularly nuisance law narrow sense. In this context role is ordinarily regulate relationship neighbours. Therefore, crucial that it resolves conflicts arise due everyday use properties. Whether objectively reasonable goes beyond which can be reasonably tolerable under circumstances requires weighing up various factors dependant on prevailing circumstances, rights, interests, values obligations community. dispensation, based human dignity, equality, freedom, may inadvertently require courts balance out reconcile often opposing rights. To end underlying principle encapsulated phrases "give take" "live let live" arguably already encapsulates balancing respective (constitutional otherwise) given each case. However, do not always correctly apply reasonableness test principled coherent fashion, illustrated Ellaurie v Madrasah Taleemuddeen Islamic Institute 2021 2 SA 163 (KZD). This lead conclusion ignored for applied. It necessary reconceptualise order ensure common infused values. There numerous ways ideals Constitution Republic South Africa, 1996 (and even specific other than property rights) could advanced if were willing (not being held back by conservatism) able (equipped vocabulary) line Constitution. pivotal correctly, considering all relevant case, including broader such ubuntu. arguable done, would have greater potential incorporate wider range so outcomes fairer equitable, is, after all, goal standard law.