Freehold restrictive covenants Flashcards
What is a freehold covenant?
- A promise or agreement between freeholders which stipulates the way a property can/cannot be used
- Can only exist at equity BUT is enforceable at law and equity
Covenantor
Makes the promise and takes the burden
Covenantee
Takes the benefit
What form can they take?
Positive or restrictive
Contractual model
Giving a remedy in Law
Proprietary model
Giving a remedy in equity, greater flexibility but discretionary
Enforceability of covenants as contracts:
Enforceable between the original parties
Enforceability of covenants as proprietary interests
- Equitable interest
- Benefit and burden may run with land
- Benefit and burden must run together
Enforceability of original covenants at law
- Doctrine of privity of contract applies
- Both positive and negative covenants are enforceable
Extending covenantees (benefit)
- s56 Law of Property Act
- Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) 1999 s1(a) or s1(b)
Passing of benefit at Law
- ) Must touch and concern the land - Swift Investments
- ) Original covenantee must have a legal estate
- ) Successor in title to covenantee must have a legal estate in benefitted land
- ) Benefit must have been intended to run - S78 LPA 1925
Running of burden at Law
- Will not run (DIFFERENT TO LEASES)
- Covenantor remains liable:
- Austerbery v Oldman Corp
- Rhone v Stephens
Austerberry v Oldham Corp
- Burden cannot run at common law
Rhone v Stephens
- Confirmed no running of burden at Law
Running of burden at Law - avoiding Austerberry
- Chain of indemnity covenants
- Purchaser covenanting directly with person taking the benefit
- Long lease
- Rule in Halsall v Brizell
Halsall v Brizell
- Mutally benefit and burden ( MUST BOTH BENEFIT AND BURDEN)
- If benefit is taken from covenant, the burden must be taken as well
- The benefit and burden do have to be related in some way for rule to apply
Freehold covenants in unregistered/registered
Cannot be legal interests
Unregistered:
Pre-1926: Doctrine of Notice
Post-1926: Class D(ii) Land Charge
Registered Land:
Notice on Charges Register of title
Passing of benefit at equity:
- ) Must touch and concern the land
- ) Successor in title to covenantee must have legal or equitable estate in benefitted land
- ) Benefit must have passed through either:
- Annexation
- Assignment
- Building scheme
Annexation: Express
Lamb v Midas Equipment
“to his heirs, executors, administrators, transferees and assigns” - express
Annexation: Implied
Sainsbury v Enfield
What is annexation?
Basically being sold
Annexation: Statutory
-s78 LPA 1925
Federated Homes v Mill Lodge Properties
- Where it is clear which Land was intended to benefit, the covenant was annexed to that land by and no
- Helping to interpret s78(1)
Exceptions to Federates Homes:
Roake v Chahha:
-If a contrary exception is expressed
Crest Nicholson v McAllister:
- Lands need to be easily identifiable
Assignment:
Involves the conferring of a benefit on a person:
- ) Assignment must be at the same time as the transfer of the land to be protected
- ) Covenant must be for benefit of land owned by original covenantee at time of covenant
- ) Dominant land must be ascertainable or certain
Building scheme:
Elliston v Reacher:
- ) Both claimant and defendant derived title from common owner
- ) Common owner had laid out a definite scheme of development
- ) Intention to impose a scheme of mutally enforceable covenants on the purchasers and successors
- ) Every purchaser bought the land knowing of the scheme intending to be bound
Reid v Bickerstaff - 5.) Area to which the scheme extends is clearly defined
Passing of burden at equity:
Tulk v Moxhay:
- ) Covenant must be restrictive/negative
- ) It must touch and concern the land (Swift)
- ) At the date of the covenant, the covenantee must have owned the land benefitted
- ) The burden must have been intended to run with the land of the covenantor (Can be implied by s78 LPA)
Re Ecclesiastical
Held that effect of s56 is that a third party is to be held as if an original covenantee
Amsprop Trading v Harris Distribution
Held s56 only affected where covenantee was involved BUT doesn’t depart from Re Ecclesiastical