[2004] EWCA Civ 410, 1 April 2004. Appellant company (C) and respondent house owner (M) cross-appealed against an order determining the extent to which land of which C was the purchaser, under a conditional contract, was subject to restrictive covenants which M claimed to be entitled to benefit of. The land had originally been sold for building development to two brothers operating as a company. The company sold off the land in plots to individual purchasers by way of conveyances subject to restrictive covenants. There were four conveyances relevant to claim: Arthur; Humphreys; Roberts; and Wing. M was proprietor of a property known as Newlyn which was part of the land conveyed by the Wing conveyance. C entered into a conditional contract to purchase land which comprised part of all four conveyances to build five new houses. M contended this would breach terms of the restrictive covenants which as owner of Newlyn was entitled to benefit. HC ([2002] EWHC 2443 (Ch), [2003] 1 All ER 46) ruled that M was entitled to the benefit of the covenants imposed but ruled that the building restriction had been spent on the death of the two brothers or the dissolution of their company. However, the user restriction precluded C from erecting more than one dwelling house. C appealed challenging the finding on the effect of the user restriction and M cross-appealed challenging the finding that the building restriction was spent. C argued that on a true construction of the relevant conveyances and under the terms of the Law of Property Act 1925 s78 there was no annexation to land. "Held": the benefit of the covenants was not annexed to the land owned by M. Appeal allowed, cross-appeal dismissed. View judgment at www.bailii.org