RHJ Ltd v FT Patten (Holdings) Ltd & Anor [2008] EWCA Civ 151 (12 March 2008)

RHJ Ltd v FT Patten (Holdings) Ltd & Anor [2008] EWCA Civ 151 (12 March 2008)

A lease provision excepting and reserving to the lessor the right to build as it thinks fit on adjoining land, even without an express reference to light, constitutes an agreement within section 3 of the Prescription Act 1832, preventing the acquisition of a right to light by prescription, provided the provision, on its true construction, renders the enjoyment of light permissive or capable of being terminated.

Citation
[2008] EWCA Civ 151
Parties
Claimant Appellant: RHJ Limited; First Defendant Respondent: FT Patten (Holdings) Limited; Second Defendant Respondent: FT Patten Properties (Liverpool) Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Easements, Prescription, Right to Light, Leasehold, Statutory Interpretation
Property Law Land Law Easements Prescription Right to Light Leasehold Statutory Interpretation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

RHJ Limited

Claimant Appellant

FT Patten (Holdings) Limited

First Defendant Respondent

FT Patten Properties (Liverpool) Ltd

Second Defendant Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What constitutes a 'consent or agreement' under section 3 of the Prescription Act 1832 sufficient to prevent the acquisition of a right to light by prescription?
  2. 2 Is an express reference to light required in the relevant lease provision to satisfy section 3 of the 1832 Act?

Ratio Decidendi

A lease provision excepting and reserving to the lessor the right to build as it thinks fit on adjoining land, even without an express reference to light, constitutes an agreement within section 3 of the Prescription Act 1832, preventing the acquisition of a right to light by prescription, provided the provision, on its true construction, renders the enjoyment of light permissive or capable of being terminated.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.