GPB Construction Ltd, Re Application by [2009] EWLands LP_56_2007 (20 February 2009)

GPB Construction Ltd, Re Application by [2009] EWLands LP_56_2007 (20 February 2009)

The restrictions do not secure practical benefits of substantial value or advantage to the objectors, and modification will not cause injury. The proposed residential use is reasonable and the continued existence of the restrictions would impede it. The application is granted under section 84(1)(aa) and (c) of the Law of Property Act 1925.

Citation
[2009] EWLands LP_56_2007
Parties
Applicant: GPB Construction Limited; Objector: Brian Higgins; Objector: Ray Mason; Objector: Clive Miles; Objector: Trevor Roberts; Objector: P T R Olliviere; Objector: Eastbourne Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Application Under Section 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925 / Final Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Modification of Restrictive Covenants, Section 84 Law of Property Act 1925, Section 37 Town and Country Planning Act 1962, Residential Development, Open Space Covenants
Property Law Planning Law Modification of Restrictive Covenants Section 84 Law of Property Act 1925 Section 37 Town and Country Planning Act 1962 Residential Development Open Space 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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GPB Construction Limited

Applicant

Brian Higgins

Objector

Ray Mason

Objector

Clive Miles

Objector

Trevor Roberts

Objector

P T R Olliviere

Objector

Eastbourne Borough Council

Objector

Procedural Posture

Application Under Section 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925 / Final Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether restrictive covenants should be modified to permit construction of three dwellings
  2. 2 Whether the restrictions secure practical benefits of substantial value or advantage to objectors
  3. 3 Whether modification would cause injury to objectors

Ratio Decidendi

The restrictions do not secure practical benefits of substantial value or advantage to the objectors, and modification will not cause injury. The proposed residential use is reasonable and the continued existence of the restrictions would impede it. The application is granted under section 84(1)(aa) and (c) of the Law of Property Act 1925.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Restrictive covenants and s.37 agreement to be modified to permit construction of three dwellings as per planning permission granted on appeal 29 June 2006 (ref: APP/T1410/A/05/1196369).
  • Applicant to submit proposed revisions to the wording of the relevant restrictions for incorporation into an order.