The grumble point: Is it still worth the candle?

Structural Survey

Volumn 18, Issue 5, 2000, Pages 255-258

  Pitts, Michael ^a  

^a Edmund Kirby & Sons ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Lighting; Measurement; Rules

Indexed keywords

EID: 84992944111     PISSN: 0263080X     EISSN: 17586844     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/02630800010360092     Document Type: Review

References (7)

1. Colls v. Home and Colonial Stores Ltd (1904), AC 179.
2. Waldram, P.J. and Waldram, J.M., “Window design and the measurement and predetermination of daylight illumination”, The Illuminating Engineer, April-May, 1923, pp. 90-117.
3. William Cory & Son Ltd v. City of London Real Property Company Ltd (1954), 163 EG 514.
4. Ough v. King (1967), 3 All ER 859.
5. Carr Saunders v. Dick McNeil Associates Limited and Others (1986), 1 WLR 922.
6. Littlefair, P.J., Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight: A Guide to Good Practice, Construction Research Communications, 1995.
7. Hopkinson, R.G., “Ancient lights: consequences of a recent case”, Architects' Journal, Information Library, 29 November, 1967, pp. 1365-6.