Cases - HKRUK II (CHC) Ltd v Heaney

Record details

Name

HKRUK II (CHC) Ltd v Heaney

Date

[2010]

Citation

EWHC 2245 (Ch)

Keywords

Construction - site investigation - rights of light

Summary

This important case confirms that developers cannot force their neighbours to accept compensation in lieu of an injunction - and that an injunction will be granted even if it results in demolition of completed building works.

Marcus Heaney was successful in seeking an injunction forcing Highcross subsidiary HKRUK II (CHC) to take down a two storey extension to an office building in Leeds. The court applied the principles of Shelfer v City of London Electric Lighting Company [1895] 1 Ch 287 which puts the onus on the developer to prove that an injunction should not be granted. To avoid an injunction, the developer must demonstrate all of the following:

1. The injury is small.
2. The injury is capable of being estimated in money.
3. The injury can be adequately compensated by a small money payment.
4. The case is one in which it would be oppressive to grant an injunction.

Interestingly, the injury to Mr Heaney's light was less than 1% and the Court still granted an injunction requiring the developer to remove the offending works at a cost estimated at over £1,000,000.

An appeal by HKRUK was scheduled to be heard in the Court of Appeal. However, a settlement on undisclosed terms was reached ‘on the steps of the courts’. This sends a signal to developers that HKRUK were not particularly confident about the strength of their appeal.