[2008] EWCA Civ 1180, 28 October 2008. Redevelopment of a property counted as "rebuilding or renewal" within the meaning of a right of entry that permitted the property owner to enter the adjoining property for the purpose of carrying out works. Appellant (R) appealed against a decision that a declaration was not made permitted that would allow it to enter an adjoining freehold property belonging to (E) for the purpose of carrying out works to its property for which planning permission had been granted. As R could not enter the property with vehicles, it proposed to put in place a crane that would swing over E's property for the purpose of moving goods. Disagreement broke out over the definitions of "rebuilding" and "renewal" and it lay to the court to determine an appropriate solution. Held: appeal allowed. Positive leasehold covenants were found to be misleading, in that "rebuilding" held a very specific position within planning law. It was ruled that the application of covenants over entry rights did not have to be upheld so rigidly. The right of entry was found to cover R's redevelopment as either rebuilding or renewal within the meaning of the transfer.