Adrian Peter James Ball & Anor v Ann Fulton

Adrian Peter James Ball & Anor v Ann Fulton

The approval covenant in sub-clause 6 was personal to the original vendor, Mr Warfield, as successors in title were not expressly included and the covenant was intended to control only the first building on the plot. Its omission to refer to successors, and the context of the conveyance, indicate it was not intended to endure beyond Mr Warfield's lifetime. The covenant is therefore obsolete and can be discharged.

Parties
Applicant: Adrian Peter James Ball; Applicant: Nicola Frances Elizabeth Ball; Objector: Ann Fulton
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 April 2025
Procedural Posture
Application Under Section 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925 / Determination of Preliminary Issue
Outcome
covenant discharged as obsolete
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Discharge of Obsolete Covenants, Construction of Covenants
Property Law Restrictive Covenants Discharge of Obsolete Covenants Construction of Covenants

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Adrian Peter James Ball

Applicant

Nicola Frances Elizabeth Ball

Applicant

Ann Fulton

Objector

Procedural Posture

Application Under Section 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925 / Determination of Preliminary Issue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the approval covenant in sub-clause 6 of the 1962 conveyance was personal to the original covenantee and is therefore obsolete

Ratio Decidendi

The approval covenant in sub-clause 6 was personal to the original vendor, Mr Warfield, as successors in title were not expressly included and the covenant was intended to control only the first building on the plot. Its omission to refer to successors, and the context of the conveyance, indicate it was not intended to endure beyond Mr Warfield's lifetime. The covenant is therefore obsolete and can be discharged.

Court Disposition

covenant discharged as obsolete

Orders

  • The covenant at sub-clause 6 of the 1962 conveyance is discharged under section 84(1)(a) of the Law of Property Act 1925.