Neville J concluded that, even quite substantial alterations in the fenestration during the prescription period were not of themselves material; what mattered was that the light enjoyed should be the same light as that which was enjoyed throughout the 20 year period.
Neville J
[1907] 2 Ch 500
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – CGIS City Plaza Shares 1 Ltd and Another v Britel Fund Trustees Ltd ChD 13-Jun-2012
cgis_britelChD2012
The claimants asserted a right of light either by prescription or under lost modern grant. The defendants argued that alterations in the windows arrangements meant that any prescription period was restarted.
Held: ‘the Defendant is not correct . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 August 2021; Ref: scu.463814
