header-logo header-logo

Seeing the light through the trees

29 May 2019 / Andrew Francis
Issue: 7842 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail
Andrew Francis explains why trees cannot & should not be ignored in right of light claims
  • The effect of trees and large bushes on light can cause a dispute to arise.

It is May, and as Thomas Hardy said ‘the May month flaps its glad green leaves like wings’*. In the cloistered world of rights of light the main concern will usually be the effect of proposed new buildings upon the light enjoyed by its neighbours. But in some cases, particularly as between residential properties, the effect of trees and large bushes on light can cause a dispute to arise. In such cases the High Hedges legislation (Pt 8 of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003) may assist. This article is not about that remedy. This article is about whether trees and large shrubs etc (referred to generically here as ‘trees’) on the land over which a right of light is claimed (the servient land) should be taken into account when determining whether a proposed building, or structure on the servient

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