| 000 | 01222cab a22002175a 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | L137873 | ||
| 008 | 070503e20070427xxk f g 000 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u137873 | ||
| 041 | 0 | _aeng | |
| 100 | 1 | _aWilliams, Owen | |
| 245 | 0 | 0 | _aShadowy speculation |
| 260 | _c2007 | ||
| 490 |
_aInside Housing _v27 April 2007, 15(1) |
||
| 520 | _aComments on two recent legal cases concerned with the right to light. Both considered the possibility of damages being awarded to the plaintiff rather than an injunction. One case (L135566) established that the onus is on the developer to establish that damages are more appropriate. The other (L136793) set out ways of assessing the level of damages which should be awarded. This calculation is based on a judge's view of a hypothetical negotiation between the parties in which the plaintiff waives its right to light. The overriding consideration in such cases remains that the deal should feel right to the judge. | ||
| 590 | _aKA | ||
| 650 | 2 | 4 | _aREGAN V PAUL PROPERTIES LTD AND OTHERS |
| 650 | 2 | 4 | _aTAMARES (VINCENT SQUARE) LTD V FAIRPOINT PROPERTIES (VINCENT SQUARE) LTD |
| 651 | 4 |
_aEngland and Wales _y1543- |
|
| 690 | _aPROPERTY-PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 999 |
_c78733 _d78733 |
||