Stansfield, Re

Stansfield, Re

The restrictive covenant in Clause 2(b) of the 1929 conveyance is annexed by statute under section 78 of the Law of Property Act 1925 to the land conveyed to Mr. and Mrs. Worthington in 1928, which is sufficiently ascertainable; therefore, the covenant remains enforceable by successors in title to the benefited land and no declaration under section 84(2) can be made that the property is not affected by the covenant.

Parties
Applicant: John Stansfield; Applicant: Ruth Stansfield
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Part 8 Claim (originating Summons) / Judgment on Application for Declaratory Relief
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Statutory Annexation, Enforceability of Covenants, Section 84 Law of Property Act 1925
Land Law Equity Restrictive Covenants Statutory Annexation Enforceability 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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Stansfield

Applicant

Ruth Stansfield

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim (originating Summons) / Judgment on Application for Declaratory Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the restrictive covenant in Clause 2(b) of the 1929 conveyance is enforceable against the applicants' land
  2. 2 Whether the benefit of the covenant was annexed to retained land and is enforceable by successors in title
  3. 3 Whether a declaration under section 84(2) Law of Property Act 1925 should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The restrictive covenant in Clause 2(b) of the 1929 conveyance is annexed by statute under section 78 of the Law of Property Act 1925 to the land conveyed to Mr. and Mrs. Worthington in 1928, which is sufficiently ascertainable; therefore, the covenant remains enforceable by successors in title to the benefited land and no declaration under section 84(2) can be made that the property is not affected by the covenant.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed