Right to light - restricted covenant (pic attached)

[LockdownMess]

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

Sorry (my eyes!)

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.

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

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.

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.

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!

Bump for my last reply! Thanks

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.