header-logo header-logo

It ought to be stopped

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll