INJUNCTIONS AND THE RIGHT TO LIGHT

In Hkruk II (CHC) Ltd v Heaney [2010] EWHC 2235 (Ch), [2010] All ER (D) 101 (Sep) Judge Langan QC held that the defendant was entitled to a mandatory injunction requiring the claimant to remove part of a building which interfered with the defendant’s right to light. The case graphically illustrates the risks that a developer runs in continuing with a development without first reaching agreement with those whose rights may be affected by the proposed development. Judge Langan also held that, if he had not decided to grant an injunction, he would have awarded to the defendant the sum of £225,000 by way of damages. And of course there is a relationship between the assessment of damages and the willingness of a court to grant an injunction. The greater the damage, the more likely it is that the court will award an injunction in order to avoid the effective expropriation of a valuable right. So the fact that the loss occasioned to the defendant was significant was a factor which persuaded Judge Langan that it was appropriate to grant an injunction.