Thank you. So the
extension will block your light and you object?
Let me say first, there is no right to a view.
This is also nothing whatsoever to do with that whether he has
been granted planning permission or not. That is a separate issue.
If this blocks the view,
then that is indeed unfortunate, There is nothing in law an owner can do
provided it isnt a nuisance and there is no breach of any consent.
I will add that there is also no right to a TV signal either so if
it blocks a TV signal, other arrangements will have to be made. There is
already case law on that.
The right to light is different. If a property has acquired the
right to light (it depends how old the property is, there may be a remedy.
There is no absolute right to light from across neighbouring land,
although this right can be ‘earned'.
Under the Prescription Act 1832 a right to light can be acquired
provided the light has been uninterrupted for at least 20years. However, this
right applies most commonly to a building, and more particularly, to the window
through which the light enters.
The light must be reduced by at least 50% before the right is
deemed obstructed. Let me tell you now that 50% is an awful lot of light and it
will not even be approaching that in most circumstances. A specialist surveyor
with experience in right to light matters would be essential from the likes of http://www.right-of-light.co.uk/
you will find the site most useful and the calculation is here
BUT, if a title specifically excludes the right to light, there is
nothing an owner can do regarding light . This is most common if both e pieces
used to belong to the same person and one part was sold off and the seller
excluded right to light. You need to check the deeds.
The next to last resort, is appeal the planning decision on the
grounds that the extension would have a severe impact on your property. If that
fails you can seek judicial review of the council's decision. You can only seek
this on the grounds of irrationality, illegality or procedural impropriety. Not
just because you don't like the decision.
Now to come back to the particular clause.
The word "transfer" in the first line of the question "it is
hereby agreed and declared that the transfer shall not be etc" will either
refer to transferor or transferee. I think it is probably transferee which in
this case is you.
It says that you shall not become entitled to any right of light
unless you already acquired one so you would need to have enjoyed light through
that window since 1959 and have proof of such. To be honest there is not a very
big burden of proof on that unless there has ever been a building next door.
There must also be no document/deeds prior to 1979 excluding light
in the way that the 1979 one does.
It also refers to other easements which may have been created
since 1979 or before 1979 such as rights of access.
Does that answer the question? Can I help further? Can I answer
any specific points?
If you want to ask any further information on the dates, I will
need to know when the house was built and whether there is any similar
provision in previous deeds with regard to the right to light.
sorry, I appreciate that a lot of this this is not the answer you wanted but
there is no point in me misleading. I have a duty to advise you truthfully and
honestly even if that answer is unfavourable.
Please don't forget to
positively rate my answer service even if it was not what you wanted to hear. You
should now see a series of buttons which enable you to rate my answer service
If you don't rate it positively, then the site keep your deposit and I get 0
for my time. It is imperative that you give my answer a positive rating.
It doesn't give me, "a pat on the head", "good boy" (like ebay), it is my
If in ratings you feel that you expected more or it only helped a little,
The thread does remain open for me to answer follow-up questions after rating
my answer service.