Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2006] All ER (D) 407 (Jul)
Neutral Citation: [2006] EWHC 1941 (Ch)
Court: Chancery Division
Judge:

Stephen Smith QC sitting as a deputy judge of the High Court
Representation Stephen Bickford-smith (instructed by Child & Child) for the claimant.
  Andrew Francis (instructed by Dawsons) for the defendants.
Judgment Dates: 27 July 2006

Catchwords

Easement - Light - Interference with light - Defendants' development interfering with light to claimant's property - Claimant seeking mandatory injunction - Whether interference complained of amounting to nuisance - Whether interference entitling claimant to injunction.

The Case

In a case where the claimant alleged that the defendants' development had interfered with his right to light, and he sought a mandatory injunction requiring the defendants to dismantle their building works, the court ruled that there had been an actionable interference with the claimant's right to light but that the grant of the injunction would have been oppressive against the defendants. Accordingly, damages were awarded in lieu of the injunction.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.

Lexis®Library

  • An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
  • The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
  • Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
  • Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary