A landowner applied to the plaintiffs for their sanction to a new street scheme. It was given but subject to his covenant to keep certain land unbuilt upon. He gave the covenant. The plaintiffs themselves had no land in the area capable of benefitting, and it was conceded that the covenant did not run with the land at law. The land was sold to the defendant who had notice of the restrictive covenant, but built upon the land. The plaintiffs sought to enforce the covenant.
Held: The purchaser was not bound at law or in equity despite notice if the covenantee is not in possession of or interested in the land which was intended to benefit. Scrutton J described the mischief arising on the sale of land by local authorities: ‘For I regard it as very regrettable that a public body should be prevented from enforcing a restriction on the use of property imposed for the public benefit against persons who bought the property knowing of the restriction, by the apparently immaterial circumstance that the public body does not own any land in the immediate neighbourhood. But, after a careful consideration of the authorities, I am forced to the view that the later decisions of this Court compel me so to hold.’
Scrutton J
[1914] 3 KB 642
England and Wales
Citing:
Criticised – Tulk v Moxhay 22-Dec-1848
A, being seised of the centre garden and some houses in Leicester Square, conveyed the garden to B in fee, and B covenanted for himself and his assigns to keep the garden unbuilt upon.
Held: A purchaser from B, with notice of the covenant, was . .
Cited by:
Cited – Half Moon Bay Limited v Crown Eagle Hotels Limited PC 20-May-2002
Strips of land lay between the two hotels operated by the parties. Restrictive covenants had been entered into by the respondent’s predecessors in title. The claimant brought proceedings to enforce the restrictions on the use of the land. An earlier . .
Cited – Cantrell v Wycombe District Council CA 29-Jul-2008
The appellant had bought a house at auction. It had previously been sold by a local authority subject to a covenant by the buyer allowing the authority to nominate tenants. The covenant was said to be binding on successors in title, and was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Land
Leading Case
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.180910