L8: Freehold Covenants Flashcards
What are freehold covenants?
Promises made between freehold owners of land
Rights affecting the enjoyment of adjoining land
Are contracts
Examples of freehold covenants
Promise to plant trees, paint house, maintain road, not to erect structures higher than 2 storeys.
Person making the promise
Covenantor (subject to the burden of the promise)
Person to whom the promise is made
Covenantee (enjoys the benefit of the promise)
Formalities for freehold covenants
Must be made by deed s1 LPMPA
Contract law -> automatic enforceability between original parties under privity of contract
How to determine enforceability of a covenant
Has the benefit of the covenant run to the claimant?
Has the burden of the covenant run to the defendant?
Who is an original party?
Those expressly named in the deed that created the covenant
S56- any person considered a party so long as the covenant contains a general description of covenantees and subscribes to the given definition
White v Bijou Mansions- particular, defined and identifiable individuals where there is evidence they were intended to benefit from a covenant
What rule did Amsprop v Harris establish?
True aim of s56 = does not allow third parties to sue purely for their benefit- contract must purport to be made with them
How else can a covenant be enforced?
Contracts (Right of Third Parties Act) 1999
A third party may enforce a term if the contract provides expressly that he is able to do so or if the contract purports to confer a benefit on him
Must be expressly identified in the contract by name, as a member of a class or answering a particular description
What remedies are available for breach?
An injunction to prevent the breach
An order for specific performance (only available for positive covenants)
Award of damages
Wrotham park v Parkside homes
Covenant not to develop land without prior approval breached
Court refused to grant an injunction (Would require demolition of houses)
Damage was awarded to the value of 5% of the profits
Passing of the benefit at law
5 conditions
Covenant touches and concerns the land of OG covenantee (swift investments v combined english stores)
At the time the covenant was granted, the covenantee held a legal estate in the benefited land
Claimant holds a legal estate in the land
Land to be benefited must be identified
Benefit of covenant was intended to run with the land S78 LPA 1925
Covenant touches and concerns the land
Related to the mode, quality and not purely personal to the parties
Claimant must hold a legal estate in the land
Need not be the same legal estate as the OG covenantee
OG covenantee can hold freehold, Claimant can hold a legal lease
The land to be benefited must be identified
Can be done with aid of extrinsic evidence
Benefit of covenant was intended to run with the land
Benefit must be shown to be annexed to the land (is fixed for all time)
express annexation
Express
Plain in the deed that it is intended to benefit successors
Rogers
Benefit of c restricting building more than one house on a plot of land was found to be expressly annexed
Term stated the C was to endure to the benefit of the mortgagees, their heirs and assigns
Re Ballard’s Conveyance
Benefit of covenant restricting building works extending to 1.700 acres so large it was impossible to prove the entire estate was to benefit
Annexation ineffective
Implied annexation
Implied from the surrounding circumstances
Marten
Benefit of C providing that land would only be used for agriculture and expressed to be made with covenantee and its successors in title = impliedly annexed to the whole estate
statutory annexation
Automatic annexation of covenants granted on or after 1 Jan 1926
Federated homes v Mill lodge properties
ML covenanted with site owner that no more than 300 homes would be built on purchased land
FH purchased rest of development land brought legal proceedings for an injunction to prevent anticipatory breach
Held: s78 = benefit of C was statutorily annexed to the land
qualifications to s78
Covenant must have been granted on or after 1 Jan 1926 (sainsbury v Enfield LBC)
Covenant must touch and concern covenantee’s land Federated homes
Must be no contrary intention excluding operation of provision Crest
Land benefited must be identified or capable of identification Crest