Skip to main content

Insight article

January 26, 2022

Drones – Keep them out of my air space

Recently this firm handed its office lease back to its landlord, who had commissioned a drone survey of our hard-to-get-to roof to see how dilapidated it was. A voice in my head said, 'that's our air space, and you need our consent to fly your drone in it'. It was an interesting thought.

In a landowner versus drones situation, the former can draw on the principle that the air space in the vertical column above his land is his to such height as is necessary for the ordinary use and enjoyment of his property. Entering that air space is a trespass and exposes the trespasser to a claim for damages and injunctive relief.

So, for example, it is commonplace for developers to negotiate a licence to enable the jibs of their cranes to go through the air space of an adjoining property owner to preclude a claim for trespass and the possibility of an injunction to impede building progress. A developer has to invest a lot before starting a building project and is unlikely to take a chance.

The stakes are usually much lower for someone interested in collecting images with a camera fitted to a drone. The imagery results are impressive, with drone cameras that can hover and zoom in for close-up results. A surveyor or journalist may be more gung ho about just going ahead with a one-off trespass. A one-off infringement is unlikely to generate litigation, save in egregious cases.

A landowner aggrieved by a drone flying through his air space can potentially claim under many heads. It is not only the law on trespass that may yield a claim; there is the tort of a private nuisance, the rights to data protection in the collected images, and claims for breach of privacy and confidentiality, depending on the circumstances.

Does this mean that investors in drone technology should give up in the face of powerful, long-held vested interests in land? History shows that landowners have to yield to advances in technology in the end. One can go back to the 19th century when the landed gentry fought the railways, to the 20th century when governments would compulsorily buy land needed for urban expansion and roadway infrastructure, and more recently to the imposition of telecommunication legislation which has transferred rooftop property rights to telecoms operators. The public interest generally prevails.

Some prescient commentators see a future distribution system where online sellers have district hubs or vertiports (on the top of buildings) where drones collect goods for transportation via air traffic channels to our homes. Of course, if establishing such systems is in the public interest, legislation will likely restrict private property rights, which may stand in the way of ‘progress’. But it should not be beyond the wit of those who rule us to preserve most of the private property rights mentioned above, and compromise is often the way forward.

Want to know your property rights? Call John Gillette today.

Note: This article is not legal advice; it provides information of general interest about current legal issues.

Stay in touch

Subscribe to our newsletter

Stay in touch

By completing your details and submitting this form you confirm you are happy for us to send you marketing communications and that you agree to our Website Privacy Policy and Legal Notice and to us using Mailchimp to process your data.


Sending

News/Insight

  • Supporting neurodiverse people in family law matters
    Understanding neurodiversity in the legal context.


    Read more
  • Supreme court ruling on referees’ employment status
    In PGMOL v HMRC, the Supreme Court considered whether professional referees were self-employed. The case has the potential for far-reaching implications across the employment world.


    Read more
  • Business First Magazine
    Read our expert insights on key workplace and corporate issues.


    Read more
  • Why is clear contract drafting important?
    How simple contract clauses can protect your business.


    Read more
  • Ensuring equality: A legal guide to responsibilities and compliance
    Understanding equal opportunities in the workplace


    Read more

What they say...

  • Henry, April 2025
    “We have purchased flats before with 2 different solicitors who were unable to help us this time. Martin came highly recommended and are we glad. He was very professional in every way: knowledgeable, approachable, he has a friendly manner, very

  • Megan Purcell-Jones, April 2025
    “Charlotte was extremely diligent and thorough. She talked us through the process of making our wills and listened to and understood our needs and the complexities involved. Extremely patient and very clear.”

  • Hena, April 2025
    “Great experience, Patrick was very clear and gave time to explain the legal processes. Friendly and professional communication made me feel comfortable asking questions, received great legal advice.”

  • Michael Constable, April 2025
    “I wanted to revise my will and appoint RIAA Barker Gillette as my Executor and Trustees. This was handled very efficiently and professionally. It helped that I had agreed a fixed fee in advance.” Review left for: Herman Cheung

  • Anon, April 2025
    “Whistleblowing dismissal claim and settlement negotiations I can not speak highly enough of this firm and [Patrick Simpson], they were not only understanding of my case needs they also worked with the up most integrity and professionalism to e

Read more
Send this to a friend