Cases - Willoughby v Eckstein
Record details
- Name
- Willoughby v Eckstein
- Date
- (1937)
- Citation
- 1 Ch 167
- Legislation
- Keywords
- Rights of light - Prescription Act 1832
- Summary
-
The plaintiff and defendant were granted leases of adjoining premises by the same landlord. The plaintiff's lease expressly excluded the grant of rights to light or other easements over the premises. It also said that it was subject to'the adjacent buildings or any of them being at any time or times rebuilt or altered according to plans as to height elevation extent and otherwise ... approved of by the ground landlord'. The plaintiff's building then enjoyed the access of light over the defendant's property for well over 20 years. Thereafter, the defendant pulled down and started to rebuild his premises in a way which the plaintiff claimed would interfere with her rights to light acquired under the Prescription Act. The plaintiff therefore brought proceedings against the defendant seeking an injunction.
The judge held that the plaintiff had enjoyed the access of light to her building by written agreement and therefore had not acquired a right to light under section 3 of the Prescription Act. The judge held that the exception in the lease for rights to light, together with the right expressly reserved for the adjacent buildings to be rebuilt, was a grant by the plaintiff to the landlord of the right to build during the term of the lease, notwithstanding the effect on the light to the plaintiff's property. It therefore constituted an agreement by the plaintiff that any enjoyment of light to her premises during her lease was by written agreement only.