Practical Neighbour Law HandbookAlistair Redler,ISBN978-1-84219-236-8
After theSecond World War, owners of buildings could gain new rights by registering properties that had been destroyed inbombingsand the period was temporarily increased to 27 years.
, John Anstey and Lance Harris,ISBN978-1-84219-222-1
This page was last edited on 25 January 2018, at 11:37.
Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors
FOUNTAINEBLEAU HOTEL CORP., a Florida corporation, and Charnofree Corporation, a Florida corporation, Appellants, v. FORTY-FIVE TWENTY-FIVE, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.@ LexisNexis Academic
On ancient lights: and the evidence … – Google Books. .uk
is a form ofeasementinEnglish lawthat gives a long-standing owner of a building with windows a right to maintain the level ofillumination. It is based on theThe rights are most usually acquired under thePrescription Act 1832.
Paul Chynoweth (2004)Progressing the rights to light debate Part 1: a review of current practice, Structural Survey, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 1317
UnderUnited States tort law, inFontainebleau HotelCorp. v. Forty-Five Twenty-Five, Inc.(1959) the FloridaAppellate Courtstated that the ancient lights doctrine had been unanimously repudiated in the United States.[5][6]
Recent case law from 2010, relating to a commercial development in the centre of Leeds (HKRUK II v Heaney) has significantly changed the perceptions of risk associated with right-to-light, particularly in the context of commercial schemes. This case upheld an injunction against a commercial property. The result of this is that many developers are now looking to work with local authorities to try to use section 237 of theTown and Country Planning Act 1990. This potentially stops injunctions against schemes that have over-riding social or economic advantages to an area.
Dineen, J.K. (April 28, 2016).Long shadows create political hurdle for S.F. skyscraper project. SF Chronicle
Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors
Davis, Howard. The Future of Ancient Lights, Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, Vol. 6, No. 2, Summer 1989, pp. 132-153.
Text is available under the; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to theTerms of UseandPrivacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of theWikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Michael Pitts (2000),The grumble point: is it still worth the candle?,
, Stephen Bickford-Smith and Andrew Francis,ISBN978-1-84661-024-0
, Journal of Building Appraisal, (2008) 4, 513
in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Once a right to light exists, the owner of the right is entitled to sufficient light according to the ordinary notions of mankind:Colls v. Home & Colonial Stores Ltd(1904). Courts rely onexpert witnessesto define this term. Since the 1920s, experts have used a method proposed byPercy Waldramto assist them with this. Waldram suggested that ordinary people require onefoot-candleofilluminance(approximately tenlux) for reading and other work involving visual discrimination. This equates to asky factor(similar to thedaylight factor) of 0.2%. Today, Waldrams methods are increasingly subject to criticism[2][3]and the future of expert evidence in rights to light cases is currently the subject of much debate within the surveying profession.[4]
In 1984, voters inSan Franciscopassed Proposition K, which prevents construction of any building over 40 feet that casts a shadow on a public park, unless the Planning Commission decides the shadow is insignificant. This proposition causes problems fora proposed 34-story building south of Market Street, which would cast a shadow on a public park ten blocks away, for one hour of the day in the fall, as well as St. Marys Square, Justin Herman Plaza, and Union Square for significant parts of the year.[7]Massachusettshas similar laws against the casting of shadows onBoston Common, thePublic Garden, and other important public open spaces.[8]
In effect, the owner of a building with windows that have received natural daylight for 20 years or more is entitled to forbid any construction or other obstruction that would deprive him or her of that illumination. Neighbours cannot build anything that would block the light without permission. The owner may build more or larger windows but cannot enlarge their new windows before the new period of 20 years has expired. It is also possible for a right to light to exist if granted expressly bydeed, or granted implicitly, for example under the rule inWheeldon v. Burrows(1879).
In the centre ofLondonnearChinatownandCovent Garden, particularly in back alleyways, signs saying Ancient Lights can be seen marking individual windows. The design and construction ofBroadcasting Housein the early 1930s was also affected by locals declaring their right to ancient lights. It resulted in a unique asymmetrical sloped design that allowed for sunlight to pass over the building to the residential quarters eastwards, long since demolished and now home to the new Egton Wing.
Rights to light surveying practice, the debate begins, Paul Chynoweth,