Cases - Wrotham Park Estate Co Ltd v Parkside Homes Ltd

Record details

Name

Wrotham Park Estate Co Ltd v Parkside Homes Ltd

Date

(1974)

Citation

1 WLR 798

Legislation

Land Charges Act 1925

Keywords

Rights of light

Summary

The defendant built a number of new houses on its land, which was on the Wrotham Park Estate, in breach of a covenant with the plaintiff. The plaintiff then began an action, claiming an injunction to restrain building works and a mandatory injunction requiring demolition of any buildings already constructed in breach of covenant. The plaintiff did not apply for an interim injunction, partly because it did not wish to give an undertaking in damages. By the time of the trial, the new houses had been sold and the new owners (who were joined as defendants) were living in them. The plaintiff argued that, despite its failure to claim an interim injunction (which could have prevented the houses being built), it should be entitled to a final mandatory injunction (to pull them down). It argued that the plaintiff had chanced its arm in continuing to build after a letter of complaint and the commencement of the court action and that the new owners had bought in full knowledge of the risks and taken out insurance policies to cover them for the risks.

The judge considered that it was an important factor that the defendant continued with building operations in the face of clear, early protest and the commencement of a court action. He accepted that the plaintiff's decision not to apply for an interim injunction did not necessarily prevent it obtaining a final mandatory injunction. However, in this case, he considered that it would be 'an unpardonable waste' to pull down the much needed houses. Later in the judgment, he described the reasons for his refusal of an injunction to demolish the houses as social and economic. He also took into account that the plaintiff had not suffered any financial loss and that the construction of these houses did not prevent the enforcement of the covenant in relation to other parts of the Estate. Instead of an injunction, the judge made an award of damages.