header-logo header-logo

02 April 2015 / Andrew Francis
Issue: 7647 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

It ought to be stopped

nlj_7647_andrew-francis

Andrew Francis considers how to prevent the acquisition of a right of light

Property owners and developers do not like the prospect of adjoining property owners acquiring rights against them which might inhibit future development of the formers’ land. Victorian estate developers invariably included terms in plot sales that prevented the new properties from acquiring light over adjacent land, or excluded any building scheme of covenants in estates below the highest class. Nowadays the main concern of developers and in particular landlords where residential blocks of flats are being built, is to ensure that freehold owners, or tenants do not acquire rights, particularly rights of light, against the adjacent land which may or may not be owned by the developer, or landlord. This is because of the need to ensure that on future development of that land, no adverse rights have been acquired against it by tenants. Rights of light present a particular difficulty because such rights can be acquired by tenants under s 3 of the Prescription Act 1832 (PA 1832),

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson appoints Vicky Tomlinson as Head of Independent Health and Care

DWF—five appointments

DWF—five appointments

DWF further strengthens major injury and casualty offering with new partner and four directors from DAC Beachcroft

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis strengthens Grimsby child care team

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll