Conifer and right to light

[PhilboSE]

Does a neighbour have a "right to light" that is impacted by a conifer that was there before his house was built? My reading suggests they must have "enjoyed a 20 year period" prior to the tree's existence - which obviously can't be the case.

To cap it all, said neighbour is a tenant on a short term lease and moved in a couple of months ago. And the conifer sits in the shadow of my house, so even if the conifer was gone the neighbour would find himself in the same amount of shade, but this time from a house that was there 100 years before he was born.

[Boosted LS1]

This has been discussed before and iirc there is no such thing as right to light. New builds try to allow light into houses. An expert will be along shortly :-)

[anonymous-user]

There is now legislation regarding height of conifers so it’s not a simple light issue.

[paintman]

Quick google suggests that it is to do with hedges - particularly Leylandii - not individual trees.
www.leylandii.com/leylandii-law/

[PhilboSE]

paintman said:

Quick google suggests that it is to do with hedges - particularly Leylandii - not individual trees.
www.leylandii.com/leylandii-law/

I’ve read this advice, and others. What I’ve got could definitely not be counted as a “hedge” but there are in fact 2 conifers along the boundary.

I fear my situation is a complicated one that isn’t an obvious target for the legislation - particularly as “his” house was built adjacent to this established tree.

On the one hand there might be an impact to him (albeit small IMO) but on the other I don’t really want to spend £10k impacting my property permanently for the benefit of a temporary neighbour.

[BobSaunders]

garyhun said:

There is now legislation regarding height of conifers so it’s not a simple light issue.

Plural yes, singular no.

Local council planning department will be able to tell you OP if it is a problem or not.