Birdlip Ltd v Hunter & Anor
The evidence did not establish a scheme of mutually enforceable restrictive covenants; the conveyances lacked clear identification of the scheme area, mutuality, and intention, and extrinsic evidence was insufficient and speculative. The existence of conflicting plans and equivocal covenants further negated the existence of a scheme.
- Parties
- Appellant: Birdlip Limited; Respondents: Hunter & Anr
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 28 June 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Restrictive Covenants, Scheme of Development, Mutual Enforceability, Land Conveyancing
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Birdlip Limited
Appellant
Hunter & Anr
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a scheme of mutually enforceable restrictive covenants exists over the relevant properties
- 2 Whether the evidence establishes the necessary prerequisites for a scheme of development
Ratio Decidendi
The evidence did not establish a scheme of mutually enforceable restrictive covenants; the conveyances lacked clear identification of the scheme area, mutuality, and intention, and extrinsic evidence was insufficient and speculative. The existence of conflicting plans and equivocal covenants further negated the existence of a scheme.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed
Orders
- The appeal is allowed; the judgment of HH Judge Behrens is set aside.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment