Do I Have a Right to a View? A Fast Overview for Property Owners

Mark Evans • September 18, 2019

No, property owners do not have a legal right to a view.


If you are looking at buying a property with picturesque views take care. If there is the possibility of a future development blocking those views then you will not have the right to prevent that development.


Property owners’ rights to views is a long-settled legal principle and is most notably examined in the High Court case of Victoria Park Racing & Recreation Grounds Co Ltd v Taylor [1937] HCA 45. The Court held in that case that the owner of a racecourse could not prevent a neighbour peering into the racecourse (and broadcasting racing results). The racecourse owners had no legal right to the view from their property nor over the “spectacle” of the horse race. Put another way, if a property owner wants to display a Picasso on their front verandah, they cannot ask people walking by to pay for the ‘viewing’ rights. The “view” is not a quantity a landowner can exercise legal rights over.


This principle remains relatively unchanged to this day and has been reinforced and restated in many cases.

Most Notably, His Honour, Preston CJ IN Robson V Leischke [2008] NSWLEC 152 at 86 Stated

“The use of land by the defendant, which does not cause something to emanate from the defendant’s land, although it nevertheless in some way interferes with the use and enjoyment by the plaintiff of his or her land, will rarely constitute an actionable nuisance. Thus, a defendant may erect a building or other structure such as a fence, or plant a tree on his or her land which interferes with the neighbour’s enjoyment of their land. The building, structure or tree may:


spoil the neighbour’s view;

in the absence of an easement, restrict the flow of air onto the neighbour’s land; or

(c) in the absence of an easement, take away light from the neighbour’s windows,


yet such interferences are not actionable as a nuisance.”

Limited protection given by local councils and planning principles

Many local Councils adopt planning controls which seek to address this and balance the reasonable sharing of views between neighbouring landowners. Such controls become one of many factors to be considered by Council when assessing a development application. 


Some property owners misinterpret these planning controls and the ruling in Tenacity Consulting v Warringah Council (02) 9145 0900 NSWLEC 140 (“Tenacity”) as granting a legal right to a view. They do not. In Tenacity, the court described in detail the factors Councils should consider when they are assessing the impact on views of a proposed development. However, the court merely enunciated a planning principle, it did not establish a proprietary right for landowners to a view. It’s important to understand the difference. A planning principle is not binding law. It is a list of appropriate matters to be considered by Council in reaching a planning decision. If Council follows planning principles in reaching a planning decision, that decision is more likely to be upheld in court. But Council may follow planning principles yet still approve a development application, even if the loss of views to a neighbouring property will be significant or even “devastating”.


In Tenacity, the court established a 4-step process Council can adopt when assessing the impact on views of a proposed development. The court also couched that impact on a scale from ‘negligible’ to ‘devastating’. Ultimately, if the proposed development is compliant with the relevant planning controls the fact that the development has a detrimental impact on neighboring views will not by itself prevent it from proceeding.

Rights of affected neighbours to object

As part of the public consultation process landowners affected by a development proposal may make submissions to Council with respect to the loss of their views. However, there is no guarantee that those submissions will have any bearing on the outcome of the development application. Community submissions are only one of many considerations the Council must consider as part of the assessment process.


An affected neighbour cannot commence proceedings against Council to challenge the merits of a Council decision to approve a development that causes loss of views. It is open to an affected neighbour to commence civil proceedings against Council where there has been an error of law or non-compliance with the requirements of the planning process. However, even if such an action is successful, Council can simply start over, reassess the proposed development and approve a similarly detrimental development.


As a property owner you do not have a legal right to protect your view but you can and should lodge a submission to Council if a development is proposed that will impact your views.


Also, if you believe Council have not adopted the appropriate planning principles or controls in assessing a development application there may be merit in examining the process undertaken by Council.


As always, prevention is better than cure and you should do your homework if you are buying a property, the value of which depends substantially on having a view. 

Are you experiencing a similar situation?

If you are experiencing issues regarding this topic we can help. Please submit and inquiry or take more tangible step by booking an Initial Session where we will look at your existing paperwork and information and begin taking action. 

Require further assistance? please do not hesitate to call us on (02) 9145 0900 or make an enquiry below.

Mark Evans Director Whiteacre Legal

Servicing all of NSW, Whiteacre provides expert property law and planning and environment law advice and assistance.

Planning Law Advice

Land and Environment Court Appeals

Voluntary Planning Agreements and Contributions

Development Control Orders and Enforcement

Property Development Advice and Due Diligence

Title Structuring

Easements and Covenants

Strata and Community Title legislation

Book an initial consultation through our website with our planning law solicitor. Whether it's about planning and environment law or property law, you can approach us and discuss your matter to make sure we are a good fit for your requirements.

BOOK ONLINE
shared driveways
By Mark Evans February 13, 2025
Shared driveways A common example of a shared driveway is where a right of carriageway passes through one neighbours’ (burdened) land into the other neighbour’s (benefited) land.
tiny homes
By Mark Evans November 27, 2024
In Part 1, we considered tiny homes and caravans on private land. That article can be accessed here Part 1 . In Part 2, we turn our attention to tiny homes and manufactured homes.
tiny homes
By Mark Evans November 22, 2024
In this article we explore tiny homes, caravans, and manufactured homes.
By Mark Evans and William Jamieson November 14, 2024
The general rule is that a development application ( DA ) is to be determined based on the law applicable at the time of determination of the DA, not at the time of lodgement: Sofi v Wollondilly Shire Council (1975) 31 LGERA 416.
When subdivision may not be considered development carried out on land
By Mark Evans and William Jamieson October 31, 2024
Subdivision, alone, may not constitute development “on land” and thus trigger development restrictions. 
Biodiversity Credits
By Mark Evans October 18, 2024
The Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) has released a summary of workshops and stakeholders’ submissions concerning the functioning of the NSW Biodiversity Credits Market.
Development
By Mark Evans and William Jamieson October 10, 2024
It is now well established that a development consent cannot be obtained to authorise works that have already been carried out. The classic example is a building that has been built without development consent.
Planning law
By Mark Evans and William Jamieson September 26, 2024
This article discusses the characterisation of land use in NSW planning law.
Private Land
By Mark Evans and Ryan Post September 5, 2024
Public infrastructure like sewerage pipes and stormwater pipes were often constructed a long time ago with no development approval or accurate record keeping. Over time, these assets have remained in place and often the local council authority either has no record of the infrastructure or knowledge of the history of construction of the asset or its ownership. Ideally, Council would have an easement registered on title to the subject land. This can cause huge problems when seeking to develop land with old infrastructure emplaced within the subject site.
By Mark Evans August 29, 2024
This article discusses tax implications of establishing a biodiversity stewardship site and generating biodiversity credits.
More Posts
Share by: