ok.
obstruct.
1. to block or close up with an obstacle; make difficult to pass:
not a problem, there.
2. to interrupt, hinder, or oppose the passage, progress, course, etc., of.
nope. not doing that...
3. to block from sight; to be in the way of (a view, passage, etc.).
negative. nein.
there's obviously some level of ambiguity in the wording, but i admit no level of ambiguity in the fact of it: i was not preventing passage through the hall in any way, and no judge would say i was. tersely: that's bullshit.
so, if i'm not obstructing the hallway, what else is in the cited clause?
or used for any other purpose other than gaining access to and from the leased premise.
surely, they don't claim that putting a fan in the hallway is using it for some other purpose? but, they probably don't know what this part of the clause is actually about: what this is doing is forbidding somebody from setting up an office in the hallway, or using their residence as a place of business. by extension, it forbids using the hallways for things like movie shoots, parties and concerts. to suggest that this bans me from running a fan is preposterous.
again: i'm going to give them the opportunity to install a wall fan. i would obviously rather have a fan mounted on the wall than placed on a chair, too.
but, if this were to actually end up in a court, their arguments would not hold up. and, if i don't get some movement on their duty of care, and don't find placing the fans elsewhere to be as effective, i will place the fans back where they were.