Dispute over right to light.
Gabriel Moss QC HHJ said: ‘I would deduce the following principles from these cases in relation to the assessment of damages for loss of the ability to prevent an infringement of a right to light at the point just before any infringement takes place: (1) The overall principle is that the Court must attempt to find what would be a ‘fair’ result of a hypothetical negotiation between the parties;
(2) The context, including the nature and seriousness of the breach, must be kept in mind;
(3) The right to prevent a development (or part) gives the owner of the right a significant bargaining position;
(4) The owner of the right with such a bargaining position will normally be expected to receive some part of the likely profit from the development (or relevant part);
(5) If there is no evidence of the likely size of the profit, the Court can do its best by awarding a suitable multiple of the damages for loss of amenity;
(6) If there is evidence of the likely size of the profit, the Court should normally award a sum which takes into account a fair percentage of the profit;
(7) The size of the award should not in any event be so large that the development (or relevant part) would not have taken place had such a sum been payable;
(8) After arriving at a figure which takes into consideration all the above and any other relevant factors, the Court needs to consider whether the ‘deal feels right’.’
Judges:
Gabriel Moss QC
Citations:
[2007] EWHC 828 (Ch)
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Tamares (Vincent Square) Ltd. v Fairpoint Properties (Vincent Square) Ltd ChD 8-Feb-2007
The defendant had been found liable for infringing the claimant’s right of light. The court considered the proper measure of damages.
Held: The court should ask what might be the fair result of a hypothetical negiation for the sale of the . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – Tamares (Vincent Square) Ltd v Fairpoint Properties (Vincent Square) Ltd CA 15-Nov-2007
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Land
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.254481
