Freehold Covenants

?
  • Created by: Lara
  • Created on: 02-05-19 19:12
P&A Swift Inv. v Combined English Stores 1989
To pass the benefit of a positive covenant by implied assaignment the covenant must touch and concern the land. 'nature, quality, mode of use or value of land'
1 of 5
Austerberry v Oldham Cpn 1855/ Rhone v Stephens 1994
The burden of a positive covenant will not pass, reaffirmed in Rhone. However, can potentially sue original coventor under privity of contract or it may run under indirect methods.
2 of 5
Halsall v Brizell 1956
Doctrine of Halsall (mutual benefit) is an indirect method of making a positive burden run, e.g. shared driveway
3 of 5
Tulk v Moxhay 1848
To pass the burden of a negative covenant it must meet the 4 requirements set out in this case
4 of 5
Federated Homes v Mill Lodge Properties
A way to pass the benefit of a negative covenant is by annexation (permernant attachment of covenant to land
5 of 5

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

The burden of a positive covenant will not pass, reaffirmed in Rhone. However, can potentially sue original coventor under privity of contract or it may run under indirect methods.

Back

Austerberry v Oldham Cpn 1855/ Rhone v Stephens 1994

Card 3

Front

Doctrine of Halsall (mutual benefit) is an indirect method of making a positive burden run, e.g. shared driveway

Back

Preview of the back of card 3

Card 4

Front

To pass the burden of a negative covenant it must meet the 4 requirements set out in this case

Back

Preview of the back of card 4

Card 5

Front

A way to pass the benefit of a negative covenant is by annexation (permernant attachment of covenant to land

Back

Preview of the back of card 5

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Land resources »