Site icon swarb.co.uk

Dano Ltd v Earl Cadogan and others: CA 19 May 2003

The defendants appealed against an order declaring that restrictive covenants on land of which they claimed the benefit were no longer of effect.
Held: The covenants were expressed to be in favour of property for so long as it formed part of the ‘Cadogan Settled Estate’. The trust had been terminated and the property resettled. The land having the benefit was clearly defined. It no longer satisfied that definition, and the benefit had been lost. Had it been thought necessary, the benefit could have been preserved on the resettlement of the estate in 1961.

Judges:

Scheimann, Carnwath LJJ, Sir Christopher Staughton

Citations:

Times 02-Jun-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 782, Gazette 10-Jul-2003

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromDano Ltd v Earl Cadogan and others ChD 21-Feb-2003
A conveyance contained a covenant from 1929 restricting use of the land to the provision of housing for ‘the working classes.’ The land owner sought a declaration that the covenant was no longer enforceable on the grounds of vagueness.
Held: . .

Cited by:

Appealed toDano Ltd v Earl Cadogan and others ChD 21-Feb-2003
A conveyance contained a covenant from 1929 restricting use of the land to the provision of housing for ‘the working classes.’ The land owner sought a declaration that the covenant was no longer enforceable on the grounds of vagueness.
Held: . .
CitedCrest Nicholson Residential (South) Ltd v McAllister CA 1-Apr-2004
Land had been purchased which was subject to a restrictive covenant. The papers did not disclose the precise extent of the dominant land, the land which benefitted from the restriction.
Held: The land having the benefit of a covenant had to be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.182899

Exit mobile version