A couple has been slapped with a £100,000 legal bill after they unsuccessfully tried to sue their neighbours over a Victorian lantern.

Graham and Frances Pollard were taken to court by their neighbours, Roger and Margaret Hunt, over a decorative carriage lantern at their holiday home in Kent.

The Hunts complained that the vintage lantern attached to the back of the Pollards' house was interfering with their "quiet enjoyment" by keeping them awake at night.

The dispute began in December 2021, when the Pollards moved the lantern from the side of their second home in Deal – where it had been for nine years – to the back of the house.

A couple has been slapped with a £100,000 legal bill after they unsuccessfully tried to sue their neighbours over a Victorian lantern. (Stock images)

Frances Pollard, a former policewoman and her husband Graham turned on the light on December 23 which caused their neighbours to complain.

The Hunt couple, who are in their 80s, told them that the light was a "nuisance" and that they intended to take legal action if it continued to be used.

However, the Pollards responded in an email, stating: "We don’t consider that the light causes a nuisance... we reserve the right to switch the light on or off at any time".

The family also installed a small plastic shield to block the direct glare of the light onto their neighbours’ windows.

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS:

Ian Rees Philips, barrister for the Hunt family said the Pollards "then operated the lantern continuously all night for the next 16 nights on a dusk until dawn basis of around 4pm to 8am every day".

It was on throughout the whole night and the early hours. Mr and Mrs Hunt had to have their curtains drawn and had their room lit up at night, meaning they had difficulty sleeping and were regularly being kept awake at night," he added.

The Pollards inserted a second, bigger shield but the Hunts were still unhappy and took their case to Folkestone Magistrates Court.

The couple have now been left with a court bill of around £100,000 after losing their fight at the High Court.

The Hunt couple, who are in their 80s, told them that the light a 'nuisance' and that they intended to take legal action if it continued to be used (stock image)

The court heard that they had not put forward sufficient evidence to prove their case.

Justice Bourne said: "The question was not if there was a departure from guidance, but whether there was a statutory nuisance.

"The magistrates simply identified a lack of sufficient evidence. No more was needed in this case. The appellants have not shown that the magistrates made any error of law and this appeal will be dismissed.”

The couple's son, Jonathan Hunt, who was a party to the action and attended the hearing, agreed and added: "I told my parents not to do this."