Code right v. common law right: Temporary sukkah hut on condo balcony

Here is an example of a Code right (creed) versus a common law right (right to peaceful enjoyment of property). In this example, a Jewish family is asked to remove a sukkah hut that they placed on their condominium balcony for religious celebration. The sukkah hut would normally stay up for nine days. The sukkah hut does not comply with the condo's by-laws and the neighbours are complaining that it's interfering with their enjoyment of their property. They also claim that their property value will decrease. The Jewish family claims that despite the condo's by-laws, they have a right to accommodation under the Code because of their religion (creed). The condominium co-owners argue that they have a common law right to peaceful enjoyment of property.  

1. In this case, do you think one right should be treated as more important than the other? Why?