Right to light - restricted covenant (pic attached)

(9 Posts)
Janleverton Wed 01-Jul-20 07:21:40

The covenant is separate to planning.

So planning permission can be granted for development that can never be built because there may be separate legal issues that may not be able to be resolved.

LockdownMess Tue 30-Jun-20 09:30:43

Bump for my last reply! Thanks

OP’s posts: |
LockdownMess Mon 29-Jun-20 19:25:48

Thanks - really helpful. So In a nutshell, planning will
Ignore this type of covenant and base approval on whether seems fair. Then if refused, would be a legal matter to challenge based on covenant stating right has been given up?

Thanks so much!

OP’s posts: |
Janleverton Mon 29-Jun-20 19:08:42

No, your hands aren’t tied from a planning perspective.

“Rights to light” are separate to planning, falling under private property law I think. Planners will consider the impact of a proposal on amenity.

It may be that some loss of light would be acceptable/not significantly impacting on residential amenity, regardless of whether or not a right to light has been established. I’m foggy on the private legal aspect but know how planning applications are assessed.

Janleverton Mon 29-Jun-20 19:04:53

Right to light is a private legal matter outside of the planning system. So the document could say anything really, but when It comes to assessing a proposal the planners will consider whether a proposal would have an unneighbourly impact on neighbouring amenity. So something could be strictly against a covenant or an easement, but these would not be taken into account in the assessment of a planning application, and vice versa - there could be a document removing right to light but the planners will still need to consider loss of light from their own policy framework perspective.

In assessing whether there’s an adverse planning impact the planner will consider the use of the room, whether it’s a habitable room (I.e. not solely a kitchen, or a hall or a bathroom) and whether there are other sources of natural light that would mitigate an impact. They will also consider impact on outlook.

LockdownMess Mon 29-Jun-20 19:04:19

Thanks for the reply. Do you mean hands are tied re: can’t complain? Thanks!

OP’s posts: |
itsundermypillow Mon 29-Jun-20 18:48:48

Personally I'd take that to the planning office and say you want to complain but it looks like your hands are tied. This may still have an affect.


LockdownMess Mon 29-Jun-20 18:18:55

Sorry (my eyes!)

OP’s posts: |
LockdownMess Mon 29-Jun-20 18:15:44

Hi all - ndn and us have same wording in deeds. In layman’s terms will this mean neither can push back on an extension by claiming loss of right to light? I know should take legal advice but just would like to get an idea. Also is this enforceable in planning? Thanks

OP’s posts: |

Join the discussion

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet

Already have a Mumsnet account? Log in