Shire Barns Developments Llp, Re: Wealden Way [2009] EWLands LP_17_2006 (04 April 2009)

Shire Barns Developments Llp, Re: Wealden Way [2009] EWLands LP_17_2006 (04 April 2009)

The Tribunal held that the proposed development would breach the restrictive covenants in the 1973 deed, particularly the restriction on structures exceeding six feet in height, and that the modification would cause injury to the objectors by significantly altering the view and amenity from their property. The objections were not vexatious or frivolous, and thus the application to modify or discharge the covenant failed under s.84(1)(c).

Citation
[2009] EWLands LP_17_2006
Parties
Applicant: Shire Barns Developments LLP; Objector: Robert Small; Objector: Jennifer Iris Small
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 April 2009
Procedural Posture
Application Under Section 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925 / Final Decision
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Discharge or Modification of Covenants, Injury to Adjoining Owners, Planning Permission
Property Law Restrictive Covenants Discharge or Modification of Covenants Injury to Adjoining Owners Planning Permission

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 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shire Barns Developments LLP

Applicant

Robert Small

Objector

Jennifer Iris Small

Objector

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the restrictive covenants in the 1973 deed should be discharged or modified to permit the erection of a new dwellinghouse in the garden of 7 Wealden Way
  2. 2 Whether the proposed development would cause injury to the objectors (beneficiaries of the covenant)

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that the proposed development would breach the restrictive covenants in the 1973 deed, particularly the restriction on structures exceeding six feet in height, and that the modification would cause injury to the objectors by significantly altering the view and amenity from their property. The objections were not vexatious or frivolous, and thus the application to modify or discharge the covenant failed under s.84(1)(c).

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • The application to discharge or modify the restrictive covenants is refused.