Land on the north west side of Ashes Lane, Re [2009] EWLands LP_15_2007 (10 March 2009)

Land on the north west side of Ashes Lane, Re [2009] EWLands LP_15_2007 (10 March 2009)

Restriction (ii) does not secure to the objector any practical benefits of substantial value or advantage, modification will not injure the objector, and money would be adequate compensation for any loss or disadvantage. Both grounds (aa) and (c) under section 84(1) are satisfied, and the Tribunal exercises its discretion to modify the covenant to permit the proposed development.

Citation
[2009] EWLands LP_15_2007
Parties
Applicant: Anthony John Coates; Applicant: Hilary Coates; Objector: Terence Anthony Dickinson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Application to Modify Restrictive Covenant / Final Judgment
Outcome
application granted
Legal Topics
Modification of Restrictive Covenants, Affordable Housing, Compensation, Public Interest, Practical Benefits
Property Law Land Use Planning Law Modification of Restrictive Covenants Affordable Housing Compensation Public Interest Practical Benefits

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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anthony John Coates

Applicant

Hilary Coates

Applicant

Terence Anthony Dickinson

Objector

Procedural Posture

Application to Modify Restrictive Covenant / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether restrictive covenant should be modified to permit development of two pairs of semi-detached houses for affordable housing
  2. 2 Whether the covenant secures practical benefits of substantial value or advantage to the objector
  3. 3 Whether modification would injure the objector

Ratio Decidendi

Restriction (ii) does not secure to the objector any practical benefits of substantial value or advantage, modification will not injure the objector, and money would be adequate compensation for any loss or disadvantage. Both grounds (aa) and (c) under section 84(1) are satisfied, and the Tribunal exercises its discretion to modify the covenant to permit the proposed development.

Court Disposition

application granted

Orders

  • Restriction (ii) in the First Schedule to the conveyance dated 11 June 1973 is modified to permit erection of two pairs of semi-detached houses in accordance with planning permission DDD 1001469 issued on 13 December 2006 and any subsequent renewal or approval.
  • Applicants must signify acceptance of the proposed modification in writing to the Tribunal within three months of the decision.