Phipps v Pears [1965]

Premises exposed to damp and frost owing to demolition
of adjacent house.
Court of Appeal held no easement of protection against
Lord Denning MR –
‘Seeing that it is a negative easement it must be
looked at with caution … the law has been very chary of creating any new negative
Further point – In order for s62 of LPA 1925 to apply,
the right or advantage must be known to the law, in this sense, so that it is
capable of being granted at law so as to be binding on all successors in title,
even those who take without notice.
Right to protection from weather not a right known to
the law and therefore does not pass under s62.
[Law’s position on negative easements justifiable –
should do it by restrictive covenant]