MANDATORY INJUNCTIONS AND INTERFERENCE WITH LIGHT

Regan v Paul Properties Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 1319, 26 October 2006

In Regan v Paul Properties Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 1319, 26 October 2006, the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal from the decision of Stephen Smith QC, sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court (on which see our August-September 2006 issue, pp.10–12), and held that the claimant was entitled to a mandatory injunction to restrain an interference by the defendants with the claimant’s right to light. The Court of Appeal held that the Deputy Judge had acted on a ‘wrong principle’ in placing the onus on the claimant to persuade him that he should not be left to his remedy in damages. Applying the principles to be derived from the decision of the Court of Appeal in Shelfer v City of London Electric Lighting Company [1895] 1 Ch 287, it was held that the claimant was entitled to a mandatory injunction on terms to be agreed by the parties.