Case Study

Block of Flats with Pending Planning, Manchester

Residents of a Manchester block of flats secured a substantial settlement per owner and design modifications after leveraging the threat of litigation over a neighbouring development.
Back to case studies
Location

Manchester

Outcome

Settlement per flat owner plus development modifications

Date

August 2024

Legal basis

Lawrence v Fen Tigers Ltd [2014] UKSC 13

Background

A block of flats in Manchester approached us after planning permission was granted for a nearby development. The residents felt their rights had been overlooked during the planning process and sought to obstruct the developer's progress to secure better terms for themselves.

Legal issue

The issue was whether the planning permission adequately considered the residents' rights to light and how to negotiate a favourable settlement given the imminent threat of development.

Assessment & proceedings

We conducted a thorough review of the planning documents and potential impacts on the residents' rights to light. Our analysis confirmed significant interference with their light, making the case actionable. We engaged in strategic negotiations, leveraging the threat of litigation to pressure the developer.

The developer, facing potential legal challenges and project delays, agreed to negotiate. We aimed for both financial compensation and modifications to the development plan to reduce the impact on our clients. Key legal precedents included Lawrence v. Fen Tigers Ltd [2014] UKSC 13, which provided guidance on the discretionary nature of granting injunctions and the potential for awarding damages in lieu.

Outcome

Through persistent negotiation and leveraging the potential for litigation, we secured a substantial settlement for each flat owner. The developer also agreed to modify the planning permission, incorporating design changes that minimised the impact on our clients' rights to light. This combined approach of building modifications and financial compensation effectively addressed the residents' concerns.

Conclusion

This case demonstrates the power of strategic negotiation and the leverage provided by the threat of litigation. Our efforts ensured that the residents received both financial compensation and modifications to the development plans, protecting their rights to light and setting a precedent for proactive legal intervention.

Discuss a position

A director will respond within one working day.