Click the case name for better results:

St Marylebone Property Co Ltd v Fairweather: HL 16 Apr 1962

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

Acts

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

Boots the Chemist Ltd v Street: 1983

The plaintiff sought rectification of its lease. Held: The court ordered rectfication applying section 63(1): ‘I need not read any further. But [Counsel] submits, I think rightly so, that under that provision the transfer, which was a transfer of the freehold reversion, subject, of course, to the lease, from the original landlords to the present … Continue reading Boots the Chemist Ltd v Street: 1983

Harbour Estates Limited v HSBC Bank Plc: ChD 15 Jul 2004

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

Public Trustee v Duchy of Lancaster: CA 1927

The court was asked whether the conveyance of a farm out of which a tithe rentcharge issued carried with it, by reason of Section 63, the rentcharge itself. Held: The farm and the tithe rentcharge were two separate hereditaments and express words would be necessary to pass the rentcharge. The intention of the 1836 Act … Continue reading Public Trustee v Duchy of Lancaster: CA 1927

Cook v The Mortgage Business Plc: CA 24 Jan 2012

The land owners sought relief from possession orders made under mortgages given in equity release schemes: ‘If the purchaser raises all or part of the purchase price on mortgage, and then defaults, the issue arises whether the mortgagee’s right to possession has priority over, or is subject to, any entitlement of the vendor to continue … Continue reading Cook v The Mortgage Business Plc: CA 24 Jan 2012

Ashworth Frazer Limited v Gloucester City Council: HL 8 Nov 2001

A lease contained a covenant against assignment without the Landlord’s consent, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld. The tenant asserted, pace Killick, that the landlord could not refuse consent on the grounds that the proposed tenant might not comply with the terms of the lease, and that the building obligation operated as a use … Continue reading Ashworth Frazer Limited v Gloucester City Council: HL 8 Nov 2001

Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Wolverhampton City Council and Another: SC 12 May 2010

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

Chatsworth Estates Company v Fewell: 1931

The plaintiff sought to enforce a restrictive covenant against using a property ‘otherwise than as a private dwelling-house’. 30 years later the Defendant purchased the property and immediately started taking paying guests. The defendant had suggested that the covenants may be modified by the Lands Tribunal, but he made no application. Held: The area was … Continue reading Chatsworth Estates Company v Fewell: 1931

Baker and Another v Craggs: CA 16 May 2018

‘The novel issue raised by this appeal is whether the doctrine of overreaching in section 2(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925 (‘LPA 1925′) is capable of operating in circumstances where the conveyance to a purchaser which is alleged to have the overreaching effect is the grant of an easement over land, and the … Continue reading Baker and Another v Craggs: CA 16 May 2018

The Alexander Devine Children’s Cancer Trust v Millgate Developments Ltd and Others: CA 28 Nov 2018

Appeal from grant of permission for modification of restrictive covenants on land. Judges: Underhill, Sales, Moylan LJJ Citations: [2018] EWCA Civ 2679, [2019] JPL 471, [2019] 2 P and CR 2, [2019] 1 WLR 2729, [2018] WLR(D) 733 Links: Bailii, WLRD Statutes: Law of Property Act 1925 84 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Appeal … Continue reading The Alexander Devine Children’s Cancer Trust v Millgate Developments Ltd and Others: CA 28 Nov 2018

Turner and Another v Pryce and others: ChD 9 Jan 2008

The claimants asserted that they had the benefit of restrictive covenants under a building scheme to prevent the defendants erecting more houses in their neighbouring garden. The defendants pointed to alleged breaches of the same scheme by the claimants. Held: There was not only an intention to create a building scheme but also a clearly … Continue reading Turner and Another v Pryce and others: ChD 9 Jan 2008

Meretz Investments Nv and Another v ACP Ltd and others: ChD 14 Nov 2007

The parties disputed the success of a sale by a mortgagee in possession of various properties. The parties disputed the apportionment of costs. Held: The appeal failed. Where there is no express agreement concerning the division of costs, a general rule of thumb is to divide them equally between the relevant parties. But that is … Continue reading Meretz Investments Nv and Another v ACP Ltd and others: ChD 14 Nov 2007

Abbey National Building Society v Cann: HL 29 Mar 1990

Registered land was bought with an advance from the plaintiff. The transfer and charge were registered one month later, but in the meantime, the buyer’s parents moved in. When the buyer defaulted, his mother resisted possession proceedings, saying that she had an overriding interest through her occupation at the time when the charge was registered. … Continue reading Abbey National Building Society v Cann: HL 29 Mar 1990

National Provincial Bank v Ainsworth: HL 13 May 1965

The respondent stayed on in the family home owned by her husband after he had left, and resisted a possession order sought by the chargee. The husband had charged the house as security for his business debts.Lord Wilberforce described the common law characteristics of property, saying: ‘Before a right or an interest can be admitted … Continue reading National Provincial Bank v Ainsworth: HL 13 May 1965

Lloyds Bank plc v Rosset: CA 13 May 1988

Claim by a wife that she has a beneficial interest in a house registered in the sole name of her husband and that her interest has priority over the rights of a bank under a legal charge executed without her knowledge. The case raises a point of importance in the law of registered conveyancing. Shortly … Continue reading Lloyds Bank plc v Rosset: CA 13 May 1988

Stafford-Flowers, Re: 182 Brambles Chine Estate: UTLC 3 Mar 2015

UTLC RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – discharge – estate comprising 278 holiday bungalows – occupation restriction on 74 days of the year – applicant seeking discharge to allow all year round occupation and removal of holiday use restriction – obsolescence – practical benefits of substantial value or advantage – public interest – injury – application refused – … Continue reading Stafford-Flowers, Re: 182 Brambles Chine Estate: UTLC 3 Mar 2015

Bath Rugby Ltd v Greenwood and Others: CA 21 Dec 2021

This appeal concerns the question whether an area of land in Bath known as the Recreation Ground, commonly called ‘the Rec’, is still subject to a restrictive covenant imposed in a conveyance of the Rec dated 6 April 1922 (‘the 1922 conveyance’). That turns on the question whether there is anyone who can now claim … Continue reading Bath Rugby Ltd v Greenwood and Others: CA 21 Dec 2021

Federated Homes Ltd v Mill Lodge Properties Ltd: CA 29 Nov 1979

Covenents Attach to entire land not just parts Conveyances contained restrictive covenants but they were not expressly attached to the land. The issue was whether they were merely personal. Held: Section 78 made the covenant by the purchaser binding on his successors also. The section provides for statutory annexation of any covenant which touches and … Continue reading Federated Homes Ltd v Mill Lodge Properties Ltd: CA 29 Nov 1979

Hurst and Another v Hampshire County Council: CA 19 Jun 1997

A Local Authority is liable for any damage to adjacent property caused by the roots of a tree growing on the verge of a public highway. Held: Pre-adoption trees vest in the highway authority for all purposes. Stuart-Smith, Morritt L, Sir John Balcombe Times 26-Jun-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 1901, (1997) 96 LGR 27 Bailii Highways … Continue reading Hurst and Another v Hampshire County Council: CA 19 Jun 1997

Rossetti Ltd v Thresher Wines Acquisitions Ltd, First Quench Retailing Limited, Whitbread (UK) Limited: LRA 8 Sep 2009

LRA Alteration of the register to correct a mistake – Schedule 4 paragraph 5 of he Land Registration Act 1925 – mistake made on first registration in 1971 – omission of land from title – nature of right to seek correction of register – whether right passes to purchaser under section 63 of the Law … Continue reading Rossetti Ltd v Thresher Wines Acquisitions Ltd, First Quench Retailing Limited, Whitbread (UK) Limited: LRA 8 Sep 2009

Goodman v Gallant: CA 30 Oct 1985

The court reviewed the conflicting authorities with regard to the creation of trusts and held that the overwhelming preponderance of authority was that, in the absence of any claim for rectification or rescission, provisions in a conveyance declaring that the plaintiff and the defendant were to hold the proceeds of sale of the property ‘upon … Continue reading Goodman v Gallant: CA 30 Oct 1985

Spiller and Another v Joseph and Others: SC 1 Dec 2010

The defendants had published remarks on its website about the reliability of the claimant. When sued in defamation, they pleaded fair comment, but that was rejected by the Court of Appeal. Held: The defendants’ appeal succeeded, and the fair comment defence was re-instated. The phrase ‘honest comment’ should now be used to reflect the nature … Continue reading Spiller and Another v Joseph and Others: SC 1 Dec 2010

Tinsley v Milligan: CA 1992

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

Simmons v British Steel plc: HL 29 Apr 2004

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

Shaws (EAL) Ltd v Pennycook: CA 2 Feb 2004

Tenant’s First Notice to terminate, stood The landlord served a notice to terminate the business lease. The tenant first served a notice to say that it would not seek a new lease, but then, and still within the time limit, it served a second counter-notice seeking a new tenancy. The landlord sought to rely upon … Continue reading Shaws (EAL) Ltd v Pennycook: CA 2 Feb 2004

Ropaigealach v Barclays Bank plc: CA 6 Jan 1999

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

Scott v Southern Pacific Mortgages Ltd and Others: SC 22 Oct 2014

The appellant challenged a sale and rent back transaction. He said that the proposed purchaser had misrepresented the transaction to them. The Court was asked s whether the home owners had interests whose priority was protected by virtue of section 29(2)(a)(ii) of, and Schedule 3, paragraph 2, to the Land Registration Act 2002. Held: The … Continue reading Scott v Southern Pacific Mortgages Ltd and Others: SC 22 Oct 2014

Re Hastings-Bass; Hastings v Inland Revenue: CA 14 Mar 1974

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

Adamson, Regina (on The Application of) v Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 18 Feb 2020

Appropriation was not in sufficient form The claimants had challenged an order supporting the decision of the Council to use their allotments for a new primary school, saying that the land had be appropriated as allotment land, and that therefore the consent of the minister was needed. Held: The appeal failed. The use of the … Continue reading Adamson, Regina (on The Application of) v Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 18 Feb 2020

Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v London Residuary Body and Others: HL 16 Jul 1992

The parties signed a memorandum of agreement to let a strip of land from 1930 until determined as provided, but the only provision was that the lease would continue until the land was needed for road widening and two months’ notice was given. The land was never used for road widening and notice to terminate … Continue reading Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v London Residuary Body and Others: HL 16 Jul 1992

Birch v Birch: SC 26 Jul 2017

The parties, on divorcing had a greed, under court order that W should obtain the release of H from his covenants under the mortgage of the family home. She had been unable to do so, and sought that order to be varied to allow postponement of her . .

Birmingham v Renfrew; 11 Jun 1937

References: (1937) 57 CLR 666, [1937] HCA 52 Links: Austlii Coram: Dixon J, Latham CJ Ratio: (High Court of Australia) Cases of mutual wills are only one example of a wider category of cases, for example secret trusts, in which a court of equity will intervene to impose a constructive trust. Latham CJ described a … Continue reading Birmingham v Renfrew; 11 Jun 1937

Cheltenham and Gloucester Building Society v Aaron Krausz and Rebecca Krausz: CA 22 Oct 1996

References: Gazette 20-Nov-1996, Times 20-Nov-1996, [1996] EWCA Civ 780, [1997] 1 WLR 1558 Links: Bailii The County court may not suspend a possession order pending an application to the High Court for an order for sale. The court considered the protection given by s15(1) of the 1970 Act, and found the protection to be limited, … Continue reading Cheltenham and Gloucester Building Society v Aaron Krausz and Rebecca Krausz: CA 22 Oct 1996