I've been reading this thread with interest and see no reason why direct neighbours shoudn't have every right within legal limits to fight against having a business located next door. I'm also disturbed that given the anger displayed on this site by self interested parents who are affected by the loss but not by the distruption, the Piplings (is that their name?) have publicly named those seeking legal action. Shame on you.

It would be interesting to know when the Piplings bought their house and if they had intentions of running a nursery at that time? Covenants are in place to protect neighbourhoods from noisy businesses. It would be down to the solicitor who sold them the house originally to notify the buyer of the covenant. If the intention was to run a business from the premises at that time the solicitor could be at fault. If not, the Piplings are chancing it - and the neighbours have the right to fight it. Like it or not.