header-logo header-logo

Reversal of fortune?

06 January 2012 / Malcolm Dowden , George Hobson
Issue: 7495 / Categories: Features , Environment , Property , LexisPSL
printer mail-detail

George Hobson & Malcolm Dowden report on solar vulnerability

The government’s appeal against the High Court’s pre-Christmas ruling regarding its flawed consultation on feed-in tariff (FiTs) reductions for solar installations leaves in doubt the rates available to property owners who failed to beat the 12 December 2011 deadline. However, even property owners who beat the deadline and retained the higher rates cannot entirely relax. As well as the risk of future policy reversals, solar installations remain vulnerable, given the current law on easements, to neighbouring development.

There is no right to receive unrestricted sunlight for conversion into renewable energy. Consequently, neighbouring development could obstruct the passage of sunlight to solar panels and reduce the energy produced by them. Lawyers attempting to protect solar installations may seek either new restrictive covenants or, in some cases, even leases of airspace over neighbouring sites. Either approach can be expensive, time-consuming and difficult to negotiate.

Rights of light?

The law on rights of light has its roots in the need for light

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll