Graham Victor Baker & Anor v Alan Cucknell & Ors

Graham Victor Baker & Anor v Alan Cucknell & Ors

The Tribunal found that the covenant did not secure any practical benefits of substantial value or advantage to the objectors, either individually or cumulatively, and that any loss could be compensated by money. The Tribunal exercised its discretion to modify the covenant to permit the development of the bungalow in accordance with the planning permission, subject to payment of compensation to the objectors.

Parties
Applicant: Graham Victor Baker; Applicant: Emma Jane Baker; Objector: Alan Cucknell; Objector: Rachel Cucknell; Objector: Andrew Simpson; Objector: Sawitree Simpson; Objector: Daniel Li-Yan-Hui; Objector: Xiao Li-Yan-Hui
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Application Under Section 84 Law of Property Act 1925 / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application allowed; covenant modified subject to payment of compensation.
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Modification or Discharge of Covenants, Section 84 Law of Property Act 1925
Property Law Restrictive Covenants Modification or Discharge of Covenants Section 84 Law of Property Act 1925

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Graham Victor Baker

Applicant

Emma Jane Baker

Applicant

Alan Cucknell

Objector

Rachel Cucknell

Objector

Andrew Simpson

Objector

Sawitree Simpson

Objector

Daniel Li-Yan-Hui

Objector

Xiao Li-Yan-Hui

Objector

Procedural Posture

Application Under Section 84 Law of Property Act 1925 / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the restrictive covenant should be modified to permit development of a bungalow on the burdened land under section 84(1)(aa) and (c) of the Law of Property Act 1925
  2. 2 Whether the covenant secures practical benefits of substantial value or advantage to the objectors
  3. 3 Whether compensation is payable to the objectors for modification of the covenant

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the covenant did not secure any practical benefits of substantial value or advantage to the objectors, either individually or cumulatively, and that any loss could be compensated by money. The Tribunal exercised its discretion to modify the covenant to permit the development of the bungalow in accordance with the planning permission, subject to payment of compensation to the objectors.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; covenant modified subject to payment of compensation.

Orders

  • The restrictive covenant is modified under section 84(1)(aa) Law of Property Act 1925 to permit the development authorised by planning permission 22/03182/FUL and any renewal or non-material amendments.
  • Applicants must, within three months, signify acceptance of the modification and provide evidence of payment of compensation to the objectors as specified.