Tenants occupied land next to land which was to be developed after compulsory acquisition. The tenants and the landlords asserted a right of light over the land, and sought an injunction to prevent the development. The developer denied that any right of light had been acquired. The sky contour diagrams projected that the reductions in … Continue reading Midtown Ltd v City of London Real Property Company Ltd: ChD 20 Jan 2005
A covenant required the purchasers to erect and maintain a chain link fence. Held: The covenant was a positive personal covenant between the original vendor and the original purchaser and was not a restrictive covenant. The Lands Tribunal declined jurisdiction to vary it under the section. Citations: (1962) 14 PLCR 56 Statutes: Law of Property … Continue reading Blythe Corporation’s Application: 1962
UTLC RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – Law of Property Act 1925 section 84 — whether persons appearing entitled to benefit of restrictive covenant so as to be admitted to oppose application to discharge it – section 84(3A)  UKUT 513 (LC) Bailii Law of Property Act 1925 84 England and Wales Land Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: … Continue reading James Hall and Company (Property) Ltd v Maughan and Others: UTLC 14 Nov 2016
To defeat a defence of adverse possession, the plaintiff must succeed in an action which itself had been commenced within the twelve year period. A squatter does not succeed to the title that he has disturbed: by sufficiently long adverse possession he obtains a title of his own, but ‘his possession only defeats the rights … Continue reading St Marylebone Property Co Ltd v Fairweather: HL 16 Apr 1962
The trustees proposed establishing a new trust in respect of the share of an estate to which an infant beneficiary had a contingent entitlement. A portion of the trust fund would be allocated to the new trust. Held: This was a lawful exercise of the statutory power of advancement. The new trusts must be read … Continue reading In Re Pilkington’s Will Trusts; Pilkington v Inland Revenue Commissioners: HL 8 Oct 1962
LRA Easements – right of way by foot alleged over adjoining owners’ land – land previously in common ownership – absence of an express grant in the conveyance – implied grant under the rule in Wheeldon v Burrows . .
Objecting neighbours appealed against a decision allowing a variation of a restrictive covenant to allow the owner to convert a dwellinghouse into two self-contained apartments.
Held: The appeal failed. The power in the 1985 Act to vary a . .
Two brothers were in partneship in unequal shares, but acquired a property for use by the business which they held in equal shares. They agreed a parol yearly tenancy between themselves as owners and as partners. After one died his son took over his . .
To defeat a defence of adverse possession, the plaintiff must succeed in an action which itself had been commenced within the twelve year period. A squatter does not succeed to the title that he has disturbed: by sufficiently long adverse possession . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
The plaintiff had bought land landlocked save over a bridge and a lane beonging to the defendant leading to the highway. He claimed a right of way relying on a conditional grant from 1906, section 62 of the 1925 Act, and also asserted a way by necessity. Held: The defendant’s appeal succeeded. Public policy could … Continue reading Nickerson v Barraclough: CA 2 Jan 1981
F granted T a lease reserving the right to deal with all rights in the property as F wanted. T used the back court and gate for business deliveries but then F granted the freehold to the plaintiff, who in turn denied all right to use the back court or gate as T had been … Continue reading Green v Ashco Horticulturist Ltd: 1966
A court order can properly be recalled to correct an error before it had been perfected. This appeal was rejected also as attempt to re-litigate the interpretation of a section in the appeal judgement. Citations: Gazette 07-May-1998,  EWCA Civ 746 Statutes: Law of Property Act 1925 62 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also … Continue reading Hillman and Hillman v Rogers and Rogers: CA 30 Apr 1998
The parties were neighbours, with houses adjacent to a right of way. Slabs had been laid next to the houses forming a raised pavement. The respondents had sought to enclose their area of this raised pavement, building a porch. They now appealed an order requiring to remove what had already been built. Held: The pavement … Continue reading Minor v Groves: CA 20 Nov 1997
The fact that a way is not itself made up or identifiable on the ground may not be fatal to the establishment of an easement under Wheeldon v. Burrows or section 62 of the 1925 Act, if the ends of the way are apparent and it is clear that it was the intention of the … Continue reading Hansford v Jago: 1921
The respondent was tenant of premises with exclusive access to an area of the roof which had been used by her for leisure purposes. The freeholder objected, and she claimed that the use was in the nature of an easement which had passed to her under the section when she took a transfer of the … Continue reading Hanina v Morland: CA 7 Dec 2000
The court considered an assertion that a right of necessity was implied into a deed. Held: ‘In the present case the land conveyed was plainly intended to be used for building purposes, and of course it plainly needed access for building materials and for the occupants of the houses when constructed: yet there was the … Continue reading Nickerson v Barraclough (1): ChD 1980
In a shopping centre, a tenant and its customers had acquired the right under s62 of the 1925 Act to use the concourse. The tenant was therefore entitled to an injunction to prevent the landlord further developing the concourse in such a way as to infringe those rights. Citations:  EGCS 120 Statutes: Landlord and … Continue reading Pretoria Warehousing Co Ltd v Shelton: 1993
Complex family trusts had been created over many years. Various documents were now disputed, and particularly the extent of land demised by a lease, and whether a surender of a lease had occurred. Landslides had disturbed the boundaries of the land. An arbitrator had decided the new rent on the basis of his own findings … Continue reading Rysaffe Trustee Company (CI) Ltd and Another v Ataghan Ltd and others: ChD 8 Aug 2006
Except where a right claimed is continuous and apparent, there must be diversity of ownership or occupation prior to the conveyance for section 62 (1) to apply.  2 Ch 177 Law of Property Act 1925 62(1) England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Sovmots Investments Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment HL … Continue reading Long v Gowlett: 1923
A greenhouse was not an ‘erection’ within section 62(1). Megaw LJ noted that it was customary to move the greenhouse every few years, Megaw LJ  CLY 3040 Law of Property Act 1925 62(1) England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Elitestone Ltd v Morris and Another HL 1-May-1997 The plaintiff acquired land on which … Continue reading H E Dibble v Moore: CA 1969
The claimants sought a declaration that they had two rights of way over a neighbour’s land. One was claimed by continuous use for twenty years, and the second was said to have been implied under the 1925 Act. No express grant was suggested. Silber J  EWHC 3109 (Ch),  3 All ER 543,  … Continue reading Odey and Others v Barber: ChD 29 Nov 2006
LRA Rivers, Waterways and Foreshore : Construction of Relevant Legislation – Trial of a preliminary issue as to whether the Applicant can establish documentary title to part of the bed and foreshore of the River Thames; the ‘ad medium filum’ rule; true construction of the words ‘in front of or immediately adjacent to’  EWLandRA … Continue reading Port of London Authority v David Frank Devere and 7 Others – 0755: LRA 27 Feb 2013
Where a conveyance did not expressly include an adjoining road, there was no statutory presumption which would lead to its inclusion. Held: The section referred to incorporeal rights, easements and similar, and not to land itself. The Act did not operate so as to include the roadway. The Berridge case referred to cases where the … Continue reading Commission for New Towns and Another v JJ Gallagher Ltd: ChD 16 Dec 2002
The court considered the exceptions to the rule that a right in fact enjoyed with property will pass on a conveyance of the property by virtue of the grant to be read into the conveyance by virtue of section 62. One exception was if the right was not capable of existing as an easement: ‘A … Continue reading Wright v Macadam: KBD 1949
The court considered the creation by section 62 of the 1925 Act automatically of easements when land was divided. The claimants owned land bounded on either side by properties beloinging to the respondents. The properties had once been in common ownership. They asserted the existence of a bridleway easement along a track to the public … Continue reading Campbell and Another v Banks and Others: CA 1 Feb 2011
The court was asked whether a Land Registry Adjudicator could refuse to accept a party’s withdrawal from the adjudication. The parties had disputed a right of way. The claimant wanted to add a claim under the 1925 Act, but after this was refused, he had sought to withdraw leaving open a right to pursue a … Continue reading Silkstone and Another v Tatnall: ChD 2 Jul 2010
Properties, when leasehold, had acquired rights of way by prescription over neighbouring land. The freehold interests were acquired, and the claimant now appealed a decision that the right of way acquired under his lease had disappeared.
Held: . .
The claimant sought a declaration that certain easements had been included by implication in a conveyance of part of land to him.
Held: Since the easements were capable of subsisting at law, and existed as quasi-easements at the time, and did . .
The parties owned properties part of a building estate. The properties had been held under leases, but those had been enfranchised. The question was as to how the easements granted by the leases were preserved on enfranchisement. A particular . .
A right of way, originally granted in connection with a five year tenancy of a part of a house, was converted by section 62 into a permanent right of way on the conveyance of the freehold.
Lord Justice Purchas disagreed with the judge who had . .
The section in the 1881 Act does not apply to a quasi-easement because ‘When land is under one ownership one cannot speak in any intelligible sense of rights, or privileges, or easements being exercised over one part for the benefit of another. . .
The court considered the effect of section 62 of the 1925 Act.
Sir Nicholas Browne-Wilkinson V-C said: ‘The main intention of Section 62 was to provide a form of statutory shorthand rendering it unnecessary to include such words expressly in . .
In about 1930 a house, no 16, one of two adjacent houses in common ownership was rebuilt. One wall was built close against the adjacent no. 14. Thirty years later no. 14 was demolished by its later owner, the Defendant, leaving the adjoining wall of . .
A claim for an easement based upon section 62 of the 1925 Act failed. There had not been regular use of the path in question with the putative dominant tenement to gain access to it. Roch LJ said: ‘Section 62 of the 1925 Act cannot create new rights . .
Tenants challenging power of freeholders to impose parking regulations on occupiers of development. The landlord appealed.
Held: ‘the regulations in the present case – which limited the right to park to the parking of one vehicle at a time – . .
The respondent argued that the power given to the Lands Tribunal by the section, did not extend to a power to vary a positive covenant. Held: It could not be right to construe the obligation in the lease as a positive obligation rendering the tenant liable to finding himself in breach of covenant in circumstances … Continue reading Blumenthal v The Church Commissioners for England: CA 13 Dec 2004
Appeal by the Defendants against an order declaring that the flank wall of 39HP which adjoins the Garden is a party wall within the meaning of section 38(1) of the 1925 Act and of section 20 of the 1996 Act. The issue on the appeal is whether the judge was right to make those declarations … Continue reading Wellington Properties Ltd v Second Duke of Westminster, Trustees of The Will of and Another: ChD 13 Nov 2018
The plaintiffs had bought a cottage subjecty to a tenancy to the defendant. They sought possession saying that she held under a tenancy at will. It was a renancy for her life but described as a tenancy at will. The judge had held that the other terms were quite inconsistent with a tenancy at will. … Continue reading Binions v Evans: CA 27 Jan 1972
The tenant was sued by his landlord for arrears of rent, but sought an equitable set-off for damages for disrepair accruing under the previous landlord. Held: If the entitlement to recover arrears of rent passes from assignor to assignee, and if the amount of that entitlement is reduced or extinguished at common law by money … Continue reading Smith v Muscat: CA 10 Jul 2003
The plaintiff acquired land on which 27 chalets were erected. They served notice to quit so that the site could be developed. The defendants argued that they had residential tenancies with protection under the Rent Act 1977. Held: The tenants’ appeals succeeded. A built structure becomes part of the land and itself real property, according … Continue reading Elitestone Ltd v Morris and Another: HL 1 May 1997
RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – discharge or modification – leasehold flat in block of 31 flats – covenants against subletting and restricting user to lessee and his family – application refused – Law of Property Act 1925 s 84(1)(aa) Citations:  UKUT 125 (LC) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Land Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.462567
RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – discharge – modification – covenants restricting residential redevelopment of dwellings and outbuildings forming part of grounds of listed house – benefit personal to covenantee and his family – sale of majority of benefited land to third party – whether covenants obsolete in respect of retained land under ground (a) – grounds (aa) … Continue reading Coombes, Re: Brainshaugh House: UTLC 12 Jun 2012
Two brothers had acquired land as joint tenants with the aid of a mortgage. Distinct orders were made against each of them charging their respective interests in the land. The mortgagee assigned the mortgage. The brothers held under a trust for sale. The judgment creditor sought to redeem the mortgage which was opposed by the … Continue reading Irani Finance Ltd v Singh: CA 1970
Land was sold. The parties disputed whether a greenhouse was included. Held: It was a large greenhouse consisting of a sectional frame bolted to a large concrete base. ‘Building’ was to be given the meaning ascribed by s62 of the 1925 Act. The greenhouse was not sufficiently affixed but rested by its own weight on … Continue reading Deen v Andrews: 1986
The court was asked: ‘can a way which is not connected to another public highway, or to some other point to which the public have a right of access, itself be a public highway?’ A path had been registered over part of te claimant’s land, but with no connection to any route back to the … Continue reading Kotegaonkar v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Another: Admn 19 Jul 2012
A property adjustment order cannot be made against a bankrupt former spouse because the property of the bankrupt vests in the trustee in bankruptcy against whom an order under section 24 cannot be made. It was highly unlikely that postponement of payment of the debts would cause any great hardship to any of the creditors. … Continue reading In re Holliday: CA 1981
The appellant’s land was to be taken under compulsory purchase by the Council who wished to use it to assist Tesco in the construction of a new supermarket. Tesco promised to help fund restoration of a local listed building. Sainsbury objected an now appealed against the Court of Appeal’s overturning of the orer in its … Continue reading Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Wolverhampton City Council and Another: SC 12 May 2010
‘This appeal concerns the Scots law of gratuitous alienations on insolvency. It raises three principal questions. First, there is a question as to the interpretation of the term ‘adequate consideration’ in section 242(4)(b) of the Insolvency Act 1986. Secondly, there is the question whether the Inner House was entitled to interfere with the Lord Ordinary’s … Continue reading MacDonald and Another v Carnbroe Estates Ltd: SC 4 Dec 2019
The Vice-Chancellor said: ‘if land is conveyed in circumstances which otherwise would create a way of necessity, or a way implied from the common intention of the parties based on a necessity apparent from the deeds, does public policy prevent the creation of such a way from, being negatived by an express term in the … Continue reading Nickerson v Barraclough (2): ChD 2 Jan 1980
The claimant advanced funds to the respondent for him to invest in a bank of which the claimant had insider knowledge. In fact the defendant did not invest the funds, the knowledge was incorrect. The defendant however did not return the sums advanced, saying he need not return it because the contract was for an … Continue reading Patel v Mirza: SC 20 Jul 2016
Ex turpi causa explained The parties had disputed the validity a patent and the production of infringing preparations. The english patent had failed and damages were to be awarded, but a Canadian patent remained the defendant now challenged the calculation of damages for what it said would have been an infringing trade, and pleaded ex … Continue reading Les Laboratoires Servier and Another v Apotex Inc and Others: SC 29 Oct 2014
Houses were built next to a common. Over many years the owners had driven over the common. The landowners appealed a decision that they could not acquire a right of way by prescription over the common because such use had been unlawful as a criminal offence under section 193 of the Law of Property Act … Continue reading Bakewell Management Limited v Brandwood and others: HL 1 Apr 2004
Restrictive Covenants : Discharge and Modification – practical benefits of substantial value or advantage – building line – effect of proposed house upon outlook, overlooking, privacy, security and overshadowing – effect and significance of screening beech hedge – application refused – Law of Property Act 1925 section 84(1)(aa) and (c) Citations:  UKUT 262 (LC) … Continue reading Creebray Ltd v Deninson and Another: UTLC 11 Sep 2020
The plaintiff had transferred her house to her lodger, expressing it to be for her love and affection for him. The judge at first instance had held that the true intention of the plaintiff had been that she would continue to live there as before and that she owned the equity. The lodger had sold … Continue reading Hodgson v Marks: CA 12 Mar 1971
UTLC RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS – discharge – modification – proposed erection of low brick wall – covenant prohibiting erection of wall or fence – whether covenants secure practical benefits of substantial value or advantage – whether injury caused to persons entitled to benefit of restrictions – application dismissed – Law of Property Act 1925 s.84(1)(aa), (c) … Continue reading Davie and Another, Re: 15 Arun Vale: UTLC 18 Oct 2016
Where money was raised on mortgage of registered land to discharge an existing incumbrance (and so in exercise of the power conferred by s.28(1) Law of Property Act 1925 by reference to s.71(1)(i) Settled Land Act 1925) and paid to two trustees for sale, the rights of occupying beneficiaries were overreached.  Ch 605 England … Continue reading City of London Building Society v Flegg And Another: CA 1986
LAND REGISTRATION – EASEMENTS AND PROFITS – the rule in Wheeldon v Burrows – section 62, Law of Property Act 1925 and whether contrary intention must be expressed in the conveyance  UKUT 307 (LC) Bailii England and Wales Registered Land Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.670632
UTLC RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – discharge – modification – restriction to one single dwellinghouse – proposed development of second house in garden – lack of planning permission – grounds (a), (aa), (b) and (c) of s84(1) of Law of Property Act 1925 – application refused  UKUT 623 (LC) Bailii England and Wales Land Updated: 06 … Continue reading Snook and Another Re: 71 Cherry Tree Road: UTLC 20 Nov 2015
The court was asked as to the interpretation and application of the standard form freezing order. In the course of long-running litigation between JSC BTA Bank and Mr Ablyazov the Bank had obtained a number of judgments against the respondent amounting in all to US$4.4 billion, none of which had been satisfied. The bank appealed … Continue reading JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov: SC 21 Oct 2015
LRA Rivers, Waterways and Foreshore – Trial of a preliminary issue as to whether the Applicant can establish documentary title to part of the bed and foreshore of the River Thames; the ‘ad medium filum’ rule; true construction of the words ‘in front of or immediately adjacent to’; Port of London Act 1908, sections 1, … Continue reading Port of London Authority v Devere and 7 Others – 0733-0755: LRA 27 Feb 2013
UTLC LANDLORD AND TENANT – Administration Charges – whether legal expenses incurred in contemplation of proceedings under section 146, Law of Property Act 1925 – whether appeal compromised on payment of service charge arrears by third party mortgagee – appeal dismissed  UKUT 362 (LC) Bailii Property Act 1925 146 England and Wales Landlord and … Continue reading Willens v Influential Consultants Ltd: UTLC 7 May 2015
LRA A lease created by the owner of a rentcharge pursuant to section 121 of the Law of Property Act 1925 is not registrable as a lease at HM Land Registry but is a mortgage which can only be protected on the register by a notice at least where the rentcharge is to end in … Continue reading Roberts and Others v Keegan (Rentcharges : Nature and Extent): LRA 1 Oct 2014
The Court was asked whether a covenant had been attached to the land. Held: the effect of a 1922 conveyance was to annex the benefit of the covenant to land of the vendor and his tenants adjoining or near the Rec. That meant that Mr White and 77 GPS were each entitled to the benefit … Continue reading Bath Rugby Ltd v Greenwood and Others (PRE-1926 Restrictive Covenants Affecting Land): ChD 13 Oct 2020
Minor Irregularity in Break Notice Not Fatal Leases contained clauses allowing the tenant to break the lease by serving not less than six months notice to expire on the third anniversary of the commencement date of the term of the lease. The tenant gave notice to determine the leases on 12th January 1995, although the … Continue reading Mannai Investment Co Ltd v Eagle Star Assurance: HL 21 May 1997
The defendants had charged a property to the claimant bank to secure a guarantee of borrowings. The signatures were not witnessed as required under section 1(3) of the 1989 Act, and there were other misdescriptions. The bank sought a declaration as to the validity of the charge, and now applied for summary judgment. Held: Applying … Continue reading Bank of Scotland Plc v Waugh and Others: ChD 21 Jul 2014
LRA Easements and Profits A Prendre : Interruption – shooting rights – profit a prendre in gross – grant of leasehold interest of profit for 80 years- application on a first registration to register profit – substantive registration of overriding interest – whether discontinuous lease for less than 7 years – right to buy back … Continue reading Vision Engineering Ltd v Romilt Ltd: LRA 21 Feb 2014
The lease contained a break clause. The parties disputed whether the benefit of the clause was personal to the orginal lessee, or whether it touched and concerned the land, and therefore the benefit of it passed with the land. Held: The defendant was entitled to exercise and did validly exercise the break clause. The purpose … Continue reading Harbour Estates Limited v HSBC Bank Plc: ChD 15 Jul 2004
The court considered the defence of illegal user to a claim to have established an easement by prescription: ‘These authorities seem to me to establish that when applying the ‘ex turpi causa’ maxim in a case in which a defence of illegality has been raised, the court should keep in mind that the underlying principle … Continue reading Tinsley v Milligan: CA 1992
The claimant was injured at work as a consequence of the defender’s negligence. His injuries became more severe, and he came to suffer a disabling depression. Held: the Inner House had been wrong to characterise the Outer House decision as incorrect. Since the pursuer suffered physical injuries the starting point is that he was a … Continue reading Simmons v British Steel plc: HL 29 Apr 2004
Quasi-Easements granted on sale of part of Estate S owned a workshop and an adjoining plot of land. The workshop had three windows looking out over the plot. The property was sold in separate lots at auction. The land was sold with no express reservation of any easements, and then similarly the workshop. The plaintiff … Continue reading Wheeldon v Burrows: CA 17 Jun 1879
The House was asked whether an action for unlawful means conspiracy was available against a participant in a missing trader intra-community, or carousel, fraud. The company appealed a finding of liability saying that the VAT Act and Regulations contained the entire regime. Held: Criminal conduct at common law or by statute can constitute unlawful means … Continue reading Total Network Sl v Revenue and Customs: HL 12 Mar 2008
The court was asked whether the 1977 Act required a local authorty to obtain a court order before taking possession of interim accommodation it provided to an apparently homeless person while it investigated whether it owed him or her a duty under Part VII of the 1996 Act, and (ii) whether a public authority, which … Continue reading ZH and CN, Regina (on The Applications of) v London Boroughs of Newham and Lewisham: SC 12 Nov 2014
UTLC RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – modification – application to permit construction of single storey extension – reasonableness – practical benefits – effects upon visual amenity – injury – Law of Property Act 1925 section 84, grounds (aa) and (c) – application granted and modification ordered P R Francis FRICS  UKUT 128 (LC) Bailii Law of … Continue reading Thomas Re: 18 The Brake: UTLC 4 May 2012
The applicant’s property was charged to the defendant. At the time it was not occupied. The mortgage fell into arrears, and after serving notice at the property, the bank took posssession and sold the property at auction. The claimants said the bank should have taken possession only after court proceedings. Held: A lender taking possession … Continue reading Ropaigealach v Barclays Bank plc: CA 6 Jan 1999
Parents had each left a share of their estate to the bank on trusts for their disabled son. The revenue said that the gifts were caught by and taxable by virtue of sections 5, 49 and 89 of the 1984 Act, the residuary estates of both parents forming part of the son’s estate because section … Continue reading Barclays Bank Trust Company Ltd v Revenue and Customs: CA 14 Jul 2011
Trustees of a settlement had exercised their power of advancement under the section, in order to save estate duty by transferring investments to be held on the trusts of a later settlement. However the actual effect of the advancement was that the trusts in remainder were void for perpetuity. Held: A trustee when exercising a … Continue reading Re Hastings-Bass; Hastings v Inland Revenue: CA 14 Mar 1974
The taxpayer made a gift of shares to a trust set up to fund a medical professorship. The shares were in a private company, and an option was given for their repurchase once a certain level of dividends had been attributed to them. He was assessed to substantial surcharges on them on the basis that … Continue reading Vandervell v Inland Revenue Commissioners: HL 24 Nov 1966
LRA Rivers, Waterways and Foreshore – Trial of a preliminary issue as to whether the Applicant can establish documentary title to part of the bed and foreshore of the River Thames; the ‘ad medium filum’ rule; true construction of the words ‘in front of or immediately adjacent to’; Port of London Act 1908, sections 1, … Continue reading Port of London Authority v David Frank Devere and 7 Others (Rivers, Waterways and Foreshore): LRA 27 Feb 2013
The claimant had bought land from the council. The only means of access was over land retained by the council but there was no grant of a right of way. The claimant now appealed refusal of a right of way by necessity.
Held: At the time of the . .
The purchaser had failed to complete, notwithstanding the service of a notice to complete. The purchaser a Nigerian company suffered a delay in obtaining funds due to a change in the exchange control regulations. There was no attempt to exclude . .
Land had been purchased under compulsory purchase powers. It had been subject to restrictive covenants in favour of neighbouring land which would have prevented the development now implemented. The question was how the compensation should be . .
RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS – DISCHARGE – OBSOLETENESS – Law of Property Act 1925, s. 84(1)(a) – Restriction against building or alterations without prior approval of plans and specifications by the vendors’ surveyor – Whether covenant obsolete following . .
RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS – modification – covenants restricting building to single storey dwelling house – planning permissions for two/three storey modern house – whether covenants secure practical benefits of substantial value or advantage – . .
The claimant had paid money for a property, but the seller was a fraudster and no money or title was recovered. The claimant sued both his conveyancers and the solicitors who had acted for the fraudster, in each case innocently. The defendants each . .
application by Pt 8 claim seeking a vesting order under section 181 of the Law of Property Act 1925. . .
The court was asked to pierce the veil of incorporation of a company in the course of ancillary relief proceedings in a divorce. H had failed to co-operate with the court.
After a comprehensive review of all the authorities, Munby J said: ‘The . .
The appellant had agreed to take leases on a development of the defendant, hoping to sell the apartments on at a profit. After difficulties, the appellant refused to complete, and the defendant forfeited the deposits.
Held: Eyestorm’s appeal . .
The applicants had agreed with the planning authority under section 37 of the 1962 Act that part of their land would be used only as a private open space. They later sought planning consent to build a house. The consent was granted on appeal to the . .
Landlord and Tenant – Service Charges – Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, s. 27A – Landlord’s legal costs of proceedings before Upper Tribunal under Law of Property Act 1925, s. 84 – Whether landlord’s contractual entitlement to recover such costs under . .
Appeal by prospective purchaser of property from order that contract rescinded, and deposit forfeited. . .
The widow and personal representative of the chargor challenged the enforcement proceedings taken by the bank under a guarantee. The chargor had begun to suffer Alzheimers disease. She now sought leave toappeal saying that to enforce the guarantee, . .
The owner of a common appealed a finding that the neighbouring land owner had acquired by prescription a right of way across the common to use a track for commercial vehicles (buses) to get to the property (the bus depot).
Held: An easement . .
The landlord granted the tenant a licence to make alterations to the property, but imposed conditions on the use to be made of the resulting premises. The tenant objected.
Held: The landlord was entitled when granting consent to take into . .
Easement – section 62 of the Law of Property Act 1925 – farm and cottage in common ownership – farm sold off first – issue as to whether on sale the farm acquired the benefit of a right of way over land belonging to the cottage. . .
LRA Former highways and the medium filum rule – acquisition of an easement for parking – Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 s2 – Law of Property Act 1925 s62 – Local Government Act 1972, s . .
LRA Adverse Possession – Registration with possessory freehold title – Limitation of action – Alteration of the register – Meaning of alteration and rectification – Land Registration Act 2002 s 9(1)(c),(5), s . .
The parties contracted for the sale and purchase of land with vacant possession. It was subject to a lease which the seller said had been surrendered, and it refused to accept any requisitions of objections. After exchange it appeared that the . .