Overcom Properties v Stockleigh Hall Residents Management Ltd: ChD 1988

The lease granted the defendants rights of access over the grounds and forecourts of a block of flats, but reserving to the lessor the right to develop ‘notwithstanding that the access of light or air or any other easement appertaining to the flat may be obstructed or interfered with’.
Held: Vinelott J said: ‘Looking at the lease as a whole and to the situation of the flat and the entrances, the words ‘obstructed’ or ‘interfered with’ should be read as ‘permitting acts which would otherwise allow for an unjustified obstruction or interference with an easement and which would otherwise be an act or nuisance but not acts which would, for practical purposes, destroy it’.’


Vinelott J


[1988] 58 PandCR 1


England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedParagon Finance plc v City of London Real Property Co Ltd ChD 16-Jul-2001
The claimants were underlessees of an office building. The offices had enjoyed a right of light for over a hundred years, and the freehold had acquired an easement of light by lost modern grant. The roadway having been closed, the defendant head . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.267163