Man wins £65k legal battle over home 'prison' fear

Paul Knights took his case to the High Court

A man said he spent £65,000 in a legal planning battle because he feared his home would "feel like a prison" if a neighbouring property was built.

Paul Knights took South Norfolk Council to the High Court after it gave approval in November 2024 for a property to be built 4m(13ft) away from his house in Gillingham, near Beccles.

The 59-year-old said the proposal, being put forward by his neighbours, would block a "significant" amount of daylight from entering his lounge.

The council argued surveys commissioned by Mr Knights did not need to be considered, but the judge sided with him and quashed the planning permission that had been given.

Mr Knights said his planning battle had been "an absolute nightmare"

A planning statement by the applicants said the development would "integrate into the surroundings without causing significant harm…avoiding any adverse impacts on the amenity of neighbouring properties".

It added that an additional home would "contribute towards the overall housing supply" in the area.

However, lorry driver Mr Knights – who has lived in his property for 37 years – said the new building would block daylight from his living room and make his home "feel like a prison", according to the Local Democracy Reporting Service.

During the planning process, he commissioned surveys and a rebuttal report which stated the proposed home could significantly reduce the amount of light being let in via two of his lounge windows.

One survey, carried out by Right of Light Consulting (ROLC), said the plans would cause up to a 66% reduction in light levels – significantly more than the 20% maximum loss in national guidelines.

The report added the development would "significantly affect amenity and negatively impact on living and working conditions".

'Absolute nightmare'

Taking the case to court, Mr Knights claimed South Norfolk Council's decision to approve the plans was made without taking the surveys or rebuttal into account.

In response, the council argued the ROLC report was not a material consideration and that councils should not be deemed to have ignored such evidence simply because it was not mentioned in an officer's report.

Ultimately, Neil Cameron KC, sitting as a Deputy High Court judge, sided with Mr Knights at a hearing in July and ruled the officer's report had failed to take the matters referred to in the light survey into account.

Following the verdict, Mr Knights, received £34,000 in damages, which only covered part of the £65,000 he estimated he spent on legal costs.

The case will now go through the planning process again, but Mr Knights said he is pessimistic about his chances.

"The whole thing's been an absolute nightmare", he admitted.

"But I won't give up, it's going to have a serious detrimental impact on my quality of life."