Right-of-light update: a lighter touch by the courts
By Simon Pestell
The recent Supreme Court case of Coventry and others v Lawrence and another (2014) UKSC 13 should be welcomed by developers, as it heralds a shift in the court’s approach to the exercise of its discretion to award damages instead of an injunction.
Following a number of recent cases, developers have been negotiating in the knowledge that an injunction is likely to be granted in almost every case where the development would cause a significant interference with the access of light to a neighbouring property that enjoys a right of light.
The basic finding of Lord Neuberger in Coventry v Lawrence was that the courts had been applying the classic test as to whether damages should be granted instead of an injunction too strictly. The test was formulated in the landmark case of Shelfer v City of London Electric Lighting Co (1895) and states that the court should consider awarding damages instead of an injunction if all the following criteria are met..
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Shoosmiths briefing.
News from Shoosmiths
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Shoosmiths
The debate over tattoos in the workplace has raged on, with the most recent case being of a tattooed teaching assistant.
Justice secretary Chris Grayling has outlined government proposals to quadruple the current six-month sentence for people found guilty of internet trolling.
Analysis from The Lawyer
Compliance and corporate governance codes for large financial institutions will undoubtedly include provisions to regulate high pay in the future
There’s more to the ABS model than attracting the man in the street and procuring external investment. Partners at the big corporate firms, take note…