Case Law Update: Right to Light – Injunction or Damages?

Cooper v Ludgate House Ltd and Powell v Ludgate House Ltd [2025] EWHC 1724 (Ch)

The High Court has handed down a landmark decision in Cooper v Ludgate House Ltd and Powell v Ludgate House Ltd, which revisits two key issues in right to light cases: whether an injunction or damages is the appropriate remedy, and how compensation should be assessed.

The background

The claimants, Mr Cooper and Mr and Mrs Powell, owned flats at Bankside, London. Their properties had benefited from uninterrupted light since construction in the late 1990s. The defendant’s new 19-storey mixed-use development, ‘Arbor’, significantly reduced the natural light reaching their principal rooms.

The court accepted that this amounted to an actionable interference with their rights to light. The question was how the interference should be remedied.

Injunction v damages

Traditionally, injunctions were the default remedy in rights to light cases, reflecting the seriousness of interfering with property rights. However, following the Supreme Court’s decision in Coventry v Lawrence [2014] UKSC 13, the courts have greater discretion to award damages in lieu of an injunction where that is a more proportionate outcome.

In this case, Mr Justice Fancourt declined to grant an injunction. Key factors included:

• Disproportionate impact – Arbor was already built and occupied. An injunction would have required disruptive alterations that were out of all proportion to the harm suffered.
• Statutory context – parts of the scheme could have been rebuilt with the benefit of statutory powers under section 203 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016, making an injunction of limited practical value.
• Balance of harm – the loss to the claimants was real, but not sufficient to outweigh the significant cost and disruption an injunction would cause to the developer and third parties.

Instead, the claimants were awarded negotiating damages: £350,000 for Mr Cooper and £500,000 for the Powells. These sums were not tied to the diminution in value of the flats but reflected what might reasonably have been agreed had the developer negotiated a release of rights before building.

Assessing loss – the Waldram method

The judgment also reaffirmed the use of the Waldram method, a long-established (though heavily criticised) approach for assessing rights to light. Despite its limitations – such as assuming a uniformly overcast sky and adopting exceptionally low minimum lighting levels – the court noted it remains the industry standard, endorsed by RICS.

Importantly, the so-called “50/50 rule” is not an absolute threshold. Even if more than half of a room remains adequately lit under the Waldram assessment, there can still be an actionable interference.

What this means in practice

For homeowners and occupiers: rights to light remain robustly protected, but remedies are not guaranteed to take the form of an injunction. Damages in lieu may be more common where developments are large and already complete.

For developers, early risk assessment is essential. Right to light issues should be identified and managed before work begins, with negotiated settlements where appropriate. The alternative is exposure to injunctive relief or potentially significant damages, assessed on a negotiating basis.

For more on the fundamentals of rights to light, see our Right to Light article.

Key Takeaways

• Courts now take a more flexible approach: injunctions are not automatic, and damages in lieu may be preferred.
• Negotiating damages can be substantial, often far exceeding the actual reduction in property value.
• The Waldram method remains the accepted standard for assessment, despite its criticisms.
• Developers should address right-to-light risks proactively, as damages claims can be significant if infringements are left unresolved.

Contact our Property Disputes solicitors today

At Ashtons Legal, we specialise in Right to Light disputes and can provide expert guidance whether you are a developer, homeowner, or business owner. Please get in touch with our specialist Property Litigation team by using our online enquiry form or calling 0330 404 0738.