Cases - Slack v Leeds Industrial Co-operative Society Ltd

Record details

Name

Slack v Leeds Industrial Co-operative Society Ltd

Date

(1924)

Citation

2 Ch 475

Keywords

Rights of light

Summary

The plaintiff owned commercial premises on one side of a square and the defendants owned commercial premises on the opposite side. The plaintiff had a right of light over the defendants' premises. The defendants pulled down their buildings and started to rebuild them to a greater height and size. Before the buildings were complete, the plaintiff's solicitors wrote to the defendants asking them to disclose details of the plans. From the plans it was clear that the completed buildings would interfere with the plaintiff's rights. The plaintiff claimed an injunction restraining the defendants from building in this way. The judge found that the defendants' building would interfere with the plaintiff's rights of light but that the injury would be small and capable of being calculated in money. Applying the rule in Shelfer, he found that this was a case where damages should be awarded instead of an injunction. However, he believed that he did not have jurisdiction to award damages instead of an injunction because the buildings had not yet been built and, therefore, no wrong had yet been committed. He therefore awarded an injunction. This issue was referred to the Court of Appeal and then the House of Lords. The House of Lords decided the judge was entitled to award damages. The case then returned to the Court of Appeal to decide whether an injunction or damages should have been awarded.

The Court of Appeal decided that damages should have been awarded. The judge's findings, which the Court of Appeal held were justified by the evidence, brought the case within the working rule in Shelfer. The injury would be small, was capable of being calculated in money and the award of an injunction would be oppressive to the defendants.