[2025] UKUT 209 (LC)

Mr Healy called Mr John Francis FRICS to give expert evidence on behalf of Mr and Mrs Anthony. Mr Francis is a director of “Crapper & Haigh” and is based in Sheffield. He has over 45 years of experience of valuing and surveying residential and commercial properties in South Yorkshire, North East Derbyshire and North Nottinghamshire. He visited both Welbeck House and Roche House in February 2025 and took the measurements I referred to in paragraph 8.

Although the application is concerned solely with ground (aa) Mr Francis provided his opinion in relation to grounds (a), (b) and (c) as well. For the purposes of this decision I will concentrate on his opinion in relation to ground (aa).

Beginning with the conservatory, he noted that the only window in Roche House that overlooked the area where the conservatory is located is the utility room and that the view from that window is substantially blocked by the fence that separates the two properties. He questioned whether a utility room window was somewhere an owner would spend much time in front of or would stand at to take in a view. He considered that once completed the conservatory would be visible but the majority of it would be concealed by the fence.

Whilst acknowledging that he was not a rights of light surveyor, his long experience led him to conclude that the completed conservatory would not significantly hinder the amount of light entering the utility room at Roche House. He further noted that the covenant does not inhibit the placing of a shed adjacent to the fence and the consequences of doing so would be far more significant, in his view, than the current proposals for a conservatory.

Turning to the garage works, he commented that the intended opening in the rear wall would only be visible from the garden of Roche House and only then from a point near to the rear boundary.

Mr Francis suggested that the covenant provides no practical benefits in connection with the proposed works. After considering the desirability and value of Roche House both before the works were undertaken and then in a hypothetical scenario where the works were complete, he concluded that there would be no effect. Putting it another way, Mr and Mrs Hardy would suffer no financial loss.