23 May 1997
THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF NINE QUEEN\'S ROAD CENTRAL and Another v. MINKIND DEVELOPMENT LTD.
- Citation
- THE INCORPORATED OWNERS OF NINE QUEEN\'S ROAD CENTRAL and Another v. MINKIND DEVELOPMENT LTD.
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMP3979/1996
The naming covenant did not create enforceable obligations against subsequent purchasers who did not expressly assume the obligation or where the covenant did not properly run with the land; the documents did not establish clear privity or an effective mechanism (trust, agency or express annexation) to bind remote assignees, and the pure benefit-and-burden principle could not be invoked to imply such contractual obligations here; accordingly the Plaintiffs were entitled to injunctive relief and declarations.