Scott v Aimiuwu
We provided Rights of Light advice to Mr & Mrs Scott, the affected neighbour. In this case, Mr & Mrs Aimiuwu proposed to extend their property, the result of which was a reduction to the amount of natural light to Mr & Mrs Scott’s property.
Mr & Mrs Aimiuwu contended that the affected rooms were of a ‘secondary’ nature and that the remedy of an injunction would be too harsh. Mr & Mrs Scott contended that the loss of light would have a genuine impact on their working lives and future remodelling of their house could mean the affected areas would be ‘primary’ accommodation and the court should consider restrictions of the flexibility of options available to them.
The court decided that an injunction would not be too harsh a remedy and that the injury could be compensated adequately with money.