Attorney General, at the Relation of Gray's Inn Society, v Doughty

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date24 July 1752
Date24 July 1752
CourtHigh Court of Chancery
Attorney-General, at the Relation of Gray's Inn Society
and
Doughty

English Reports Citation: 28 E.R. 290

HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY

See Dalton v. Angus, 1881, 6 App. Cas. 824.

attorney-general, at the Relation of gray's inn society, v. doughty, July 1752. [See Dalton v. Angus, 1881, 6 App. Gas. 824.] Injunction not before answer in a special case on a particular right.; otherwise in a plain case of waste or nuisance. Motion before answer to stop proceeding in certain buildings, which would intercept the prospect from Grafs Inn gardens. (See the preceding case and the references.) The interposition of the court was desired not on foundation of a nuisance, but on a long enjoyment of the right to this prospect by this society; which right has been admitted formerly by parties concerned to dispute it, and by a court of equity ; viz. in 1686, when several orders on petition were made by Lord Jefferies to restrain the building so as to intercept this prospect; and the manner of defence thereto shews this right of the society was not disputed, it only going upon this, that the court was imposed on by the plan shewn. That rights of this kind have been taken notice of, appears from the act of parliament made for adorning Lincoln's Inn, where the parties acquiesced under such a right. Lord Chancellor. Before I determine this, there is a previous question, whether I can do it in this way. It is true, that by the course of the court in a plain case of waste upon a certificate and affidavit of it, there may be an injunction before answer. So there may in a plain case of nuisance, as for stopping up lights, upon affidavit, certificate and notice ; because the court will not suffer it to go on to prejudice the party in the mean time, but will stop it beforehand : but now you come in a very special and particular case on a particular right to a prospect. I know no general rule of common law, which warrants that, or says, that building so as to stop another's prospect [454] is a nuisance. Was that the case, there could be no great towns ; and I must grant injunctions to all the new buildings in this town : it depends therefore on a particular right; and then the party must...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Fearn and Others v Board of Trustees of the Tate Gallery
    • United Kingdom
    • Supreme Court
    • 1 February 2023
    ...could be acquired by prescription, in terms of a concern that such a right would constrain building in towns and cities (see Attorney General v Doughty (1752) 2 Ves Sen 453, 453–454; Dalton v Henry Angus & Co (1881) 6 App Cas 740, 824; Hunter, p 699F per Lord Lloyd), also applied to limit t......
  • Hunter v London Docklands Development Corporation
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 12 October 1995
    ...prospect … But the law does not give an action for such things of delight (citing Ecclesiastes 11, 7)." 19In Attorney General, at the Relation of Gray's Inn Society v Doughty (1752) 2 Ves Sen 454, it was sought to prevent construction of buildings which would intercept the view from Gray's ......
  • Fearn and Others v Board of the Trustees of the Tate Gallery
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 1 January 2020
  • Hunter v Canary Wharf Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 24 April 1997
    ...the building may of itself interfere with his neighbour's enjoyment of his land. The building may spoil his neighbour's view (see Attorney-General v. Doughty (1752) 2 Ves. Sen. 453, and Fishmongers' Co. v. East India Co. (1752) 1 Dick 163); in the absence of an easement, it may restrict the......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT