Small v Oliver & Saunders (Developments) Ltd. [2006] EWHC 1293 (Ch) (25 May 2006)
The benefit of the restrictive covenant was annexed to the claimant's land by express words in the 1925 transfer; the defendant's use of the land for access to the new development breached the covenant; a permanent injunction was not appropriate, but damages in lieu were awarded.
- Citation
- [2006] EWHC 1293 (Ch)
- Parties
- Claimant: Hugh Small; Defendant: Oliver & Saunders (Developments) Limited
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 25 May 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Chancery Division Civil Claim / Judgment After Trial
- Outcome
- Claim allowed in part
- Legal Topics
- Restrictive Covenants, Annexation, Building Schemes, Damages in Lieu of Injunction
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Hugh Small
Claimant
Oliver & Saunders (Developments) Limited
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Civil Claim / Judgment After Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimant has the benefit of the restrictive covenant by annexation or building scheme
- 2 Whether the defendant is in breach of the restrictive covenant
- 3 Whether a permanent injunction should be granted or damages awarded
Ratio Decidendi
The benefit of the restrictive covenant was annexed to the claimant's land by express words in the 1925 transfer; the defendant's use of the land for access to the new development breached the covenant; a permanent injunction was not appropriate, but damages in lieu were awarded.
Court Disposition
Claim allowed in part
Orders
- Permanent injunction refused
- Damages in lieu of injunction awarded in the sum of £3,270
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