 Rights of light: Time for a change?Ian Mckenna Journal of Building Survey, Appraisal & Valuation, 2013, vol. 2, issue 3, 221-225 Abstract: The Law Commission's recent consultation paper on rights to light put forward a number of proposals aimed at managing the problems highlighted in Heaney including: the abolition of prescription (for new rights only); reform of the Shelfer test governing when damages are awarded in substitution for an injunction; and the introduction of a new Notice of Proposed Obstruction (NPO) procedure. Whereas it is anticipated prescription will remain ‘as is’, there is genuine hope that the Shelfer reforms will materialise — including the consideration of a claimant's unreasonable delay in bringing proceedings — balancing the parties’ negotiating power. The NPO's prescribed time limits for neighbours to seek an injunction should also serve to expedite negotiations. The proposals, if accepted and implemented, would go a good way to addressing the inherent uncertainty faced by developers in rights to light cases, while balancing and respecting adjacent owners’ interests. In the absence of any proposal to impose a cap on damages, however, settlements (which can be huge) on a profit-share basis may still be awarded. Could it be, however, that a neighbour electing not to seek an injunction will find their damages quantum reduced? Only time will tell. Keywords: Rights; light; damages; injunction; consultation; Shelfer (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aza:jbsav0:y:2013:v:2:i:3:p:221-225 Access Statistics for this article More articles in Journal of Building Survey, Appraisal & Valuation from Henry Stewart Publications |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.