Every

now and

then, Courts are asked to decide whether it

is appropriate in nuisance cases to grant an injunction (an order that a party must do or not do something) or

to compensate a claimant in damages (money).

The case of Scott –v- Aimiuwu - (County Court, unreported, 18/2/2015) is the first time the issue has been decided upon since the Judgment of the

Supreme Court in Coventry v Lawrence (2014).

The decision looks set to provide some comfort to developers. The Court refused

to

grant an injunction and awarded damages of £31,499 instead. The reasoning was as follows:

1. An injunction would be oppressive and punitive;

2.The

interference in light was only to secondary accommodation

i.e. a garage/workshop and utility room;

3.The Defendants had planning permission and had taken expert advice that the interference was not material;

4.There

is no hard and fast rule of law that every room has to enjoy 50% of light.

Conclusions? Developers should always take advice on the impact of right to light. Adjoining owners may want to consider bringing urgent injunction proceedings where possible. if money isn't sufficient for their loss.