Not in my back yard!: was there recent restrictive covenants on land case a victory?
Series: Solicitors' Journal ; 147(2) 17 January 2003, 48-49(2)Publication details: 2003Subject(s): Summary: Discusses "Crest Nicholson Residential (South) Ltd v McAllister" (ChD Abs66116) where two restrictive covenants threatened land development. The first covenant restricted land use for the purpose of a private dwellinghouse for a single house or for private residential use. The second covenant restricted building on land unless plans were approved by a named person were absolute or spent if the person died. The judge upheld the "prima facie" meaning of the covenant restricting use to a private dwellinghouse whilst recognising that the second covenant prohibiting building had been spent upon dissolution of the company. "Crest" is likely to be used as a precedent when similar restrictive covenants are considered in the future.| Item type | Current library | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | 1 | Available | 121590-1001 |
Discusses "Crest Nicholson Residential (South) Ltd v McAllister" (ChD Abs66116) where two restrictive covenants threatened land development. The first covenant restricted land use for the purpose of a private dwellinghouse for a single house or for private residential use. The second covenant restricted building on land unless plans were approved by a named person were absolute or spent if the person died. The judge upheld the "prima facie" meaning of the covenant restricting use to a private dwellinghouse whilst recognising that the second covenant prohibiting building had been spent upon dissolution of the company. "Crest" is likely to be used as a precedent when similar restrictive covenants are considered in the future.