Covenants Flashcards
What is a freehold covenant?
A covenant is a promise which is usually contained in a deed, although a deed is not essential.
How is a covenant validly created?
To validly create a covenant, it must be in writing and signed by the grantor (LPA 1925, s53(1)(a)).
What is a positive and negative/restrictive covenant?
Positive covenant: a promise to do something e.g. to maintain a boundary fence.
Negative/restrictive covenant: a promise not to do something e.g. not to use the land for business purposes.
Will positive covenants be enforced against a successor covenantor in equity?
No, they will not.
What is the test for identifying whether a covenant is positive or restrictive?
Hand in pocket test.
If covenantors have to put their hands in their pockets to find money to spend to perform the covenant, it is positive-any covenant which requires expenditure of money, effort or time falls within this definition.
What is a mixed covenant and provide an example?
A promise which has positive and restrictive elements.
E.g. a covenant not to build on the land without the consent of the owner of the dominant land.
Outline how a mixed covenant can be interpreted as two separate covenants and provide an example.
This approach can be taken if the positive and restrictive aspects of the obligation can be separated to create two separate ‘stand-alone’ covenants; one positive and restrictive.
E.g. a covenant to pain the exterior of a building every two years (positive) and not to paint the front door red (restrictive).
Outline how a mixed covenant can be interpreted as one obligation with a condition attached and provide an example.
This approach is taken if the covenant cannot be split into two separate obligations. It is interpreted as being overall positive or restrictive and the additional element is viewed as simply being a condition attached.
E.g. a covenant not to build on the servient land (restrictive covenant) without the consent of the dominant owner (not a standalone obligation-only operates as part of main obligation).
What is the general rule on whether the burden of a covenant passes to a successor at common law?
As a general rule, the burden of a covenant does not pass to a successor at common law: Austerberry v Oldham Corp (1885).
This means that at common law the covenant is unenforceable against a successor in title to the covenantor.
Outline the requirements of the rule in Tulk v Moxhay (1848) that enables the burden of certain covenants to pass to successor covenantors.
- Covenant must be restrictive;
- Covenant must accommodate the dominant tenement;
a) covenantee and successor covenantee must hold an interest in the land at the time of creation and enforcement;
b) covenant must accommodate the dominant tenement;
c) the dominant and servient land must be in proximity;
- There must be intention for the burden to run (expressly or impliedly); &
- There must be notice of the covenant (entry of notice in Charges Register or protected by a Class D(II) Land Charge).
What two elements must be fulfilled to show the benefit of a covenant has passed in equity?
- The covenant must touch and concern the dominant land
- The benefit must pass by one of the methods in Renals v Cowlishaw (1878)
Outline the methods in Renals v Cowlishaw (1878) that can be used to pass the benefit of a covenant.
-Annexation (either express or statutory under LPA 1925, S78(1)
-Assignment (the benefit must be assigned each time the land is transferred and be in writing and signed by the person transferring the benefit)
-Building scheme
What conditions need to be met in order for the benefit of a restrictive covenant to pass to a new owner via building scheme?
- All buyers buy from the same seller
- The seller divided the estate into plots
- The covenants were intended to benefit the plots
4.Each buyer buys on the understanding that the covenants are intended to benefit all plots
If the benefit and burden can pass in equity, what remedies are available if the covenant is breached?
Equitable remedies are available at the discretion of the Court.
The most common remedy is an injunction.
As a general rule, does the burden of a covenant pass to a successor at common law?
No, this principle was established in Rhone v Stephens (1994).