Rights to Light Case Law Beaumont v Florala

Rights to Light Case Law Beaumont v Florala Properties Ltd (2019), this High Court judgment is a significant decision in rights to light case law.

It underscores the importance of genuine concern over light interference, clarifies principles on nuisance, and refines the approach to awarding damages or injunctions.

In a city as densely developed as London, this case reinforces that even incremental reductions in light can carry substantial legal and financial consequences.

Background to the Dispute

Beaumont Business Centres Ltd ("Beaumont") occupied a serviced office building in the City of London, having refurbished it and added a sixth floor in 2012. Florala Properties Ltd ("Florala") owned the neighbouring building.

In 2017–2018, Florala developed its property into a 27-room apart-hotel, including constructing an extension into a shared lightwell and raising the height of a wall that affected light entering Beaumont's property.

Beaumont sought an injunction or, alternatively, damages for nuisance caused by the interference with its rights to light.

Legal Framework and Issues

The case presented six key issues:

The scope of Beaumont's prescriptive rights to light.

Whether Florala’s works caused a legal nuisance.

The extent of any compensatory damages.

Whether Beaumont was entitled to an injunction or had merely sought a ransom payment.

Whether negotiating damages were appropriate in lieu of an injunction.

The final remedy: injunction or damages.

Key Legal Principles

Deputy High Court Judge Peter Knox QC reaffirmed the longstanding test from Colls v Home & Colonial Stores Ltd (1904). A claimant must prove substantial interference with the comfort and convenience of their premises. Loss is assessed not by the light taken away, but by the adequacy of light left.

He confirmed that nuisance in rights to light can occur even if the room was previously poorly lit — what matters is the functional impact of the reduction.

Findings of Fact

Impact of Florala’s Works

Florala’s extension and wall heightening reduced the "well-lit" floor area on Beaumont’s ground to fourth floors by 270 square feet (measured using the Equivalent First Zone, or EFZ, method).

Though none of the rooms shifted from "well-lit" to "not well-lit" under Waldram metrics, Beaumont argued that the overall loss of light significantly impacted the appeal and rentability of those offices.

Evidence of Letting Impact

Beaumont’s expert, Mr John Jones (Colliers International), analysed rental data before and after Florala's works. He showed drops in rent of up to £30–35 per square foot in affected rooms.

However, the Court rejected his full valuation, noting the limited sample size and market factors like competition from the Kajima development next door. The Court nonetheless found the reduction in light had some impact on rental income.

Compensatory Damages

The Court assessed annual rental loss at approximately £20,000, leading to compensatory damages of £240,000 when capitalised over the lease term.

Injunction or Damages?

Florala argued that Beaumont's claim was motivated by extracting a "ransom" rather than protecting its property, pointing to negotiations, a rights of light deed, and correspondence indicating financial motivations.

The Court disagreed. It found Beaumont had legitimate business reasons to protect its light and had invested significantly in premium office space. While the rights of light deed did allow Beaumont to retain compensation from developments up to a certain height, this alone did not make the claim improper.

Therefore, the Court held Beaumont was not disqualified from seeking injunctive relief.

Negotiating Damages in Lieu of Injunction

Despite qualifying for an injunction, the Court opted to award negotiating damages instead, recognising:

Florala acted knowingly at risk.

The development was profitable due to rights to light interference.

A cutback was proposed by Beaumont but ignored.

The Court found Florala would likely have agreed to pay a reasonable share of its uplift in value from avoiding the cutback. Expert evidence showed the hotel as built was worth £1.1 million more than the best lawful alternative. Applying a 33.3% share of that uplift, adjusted slightly, the Court awarded £350,000 in negotiating damages.

Key Takeaways

Rights to Light remain a serious risk for urban developments—even marginal light reductions can result in substantial liability.

Genuine use of rights is critical: The Court upheld Beaumont’s right despite suggestions of ransom tactics, stressing that real commercial concerns matter.

“Well-lit” status is not determinative: The judgment rejects over-reliance on Waldram metrics and emphasises perceptible reductions in amenity.

Negotiating damages provide practical relief: In appropriate cases, the courts will substitute injunctions with profit-based damages, aligning with economic reality.

Conclusion

The Rights to Light Case Law Beaumont v Florala judgment provides essential clarification for developers, investors, and occupiers. It reinforces that lawful development must respect existing light rights, and that courts can and will award damages linked to the commercial advantage gained by infringement.

The ruling also offers practical lessons: early engagement, transparency in negotiations, and serious risk assessment of rights to light issues are crucial in avoiding costly disputes.

Need support with a rights to light issue?

If you are concerned about rights to light issues—whether you're a homeowner, developer, or investor—our rights to light specialists are here to help. Our expert surveyors and legal advisers can provide detailed reports, assist in negotiating with neighbours, and support you with strategic risk assessments to safeguard your project.

Rights to Light Case Law - Resources

Rights to Light Assessment : A Detailed Guide

What is a Right to Light

Rights to Case Law Morris-Garner v One Step

Rights to Light Case Law Colls v Home & Colonial Stores

Contact : Rights to Light Case Law Beaumont v Florala

At Anstey Horne, we are specialists in Right to Light assessments, neighbourly matters, and daylight and sunlight reports. With decades of experience supporting residential and commercial developments across the UK, our team can help you navigate the legal, technical, and planning complexities.

Contact us today to book a consultation or for further advice.

We have compiled a collection of articles in our Rights to Light blog with more information on how a right is acquired, measured and defended, please see our collection

For advice on rights to light direct from one of our surveyors, please call our Rights to Light Enquiry Line on 020 4534 3138.

If you’d like us to call you, please fill in our Contact Us form and we will call you back.