| 000 | 00938cab a22002055a 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | L138822 | ||
| 008 | 070713s2007 xxk f 000 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u138822 | ||
| 041 | 0 | _aeng | |
| 100 | 1 | _aRoss, Jonathan | |
| 245 | 0 | 0 | _aRun for covenant |
| 260 | _c2007 | ||
| 490 |
_aProperty Week _v72(27) 6 July 2007, 83(1) |
||
| 520 | _aReports on the case of City Inn (Jersey) V Ten Trinity Square (L142564). The case underlined the need for restrictive covenants to specify who is responsible for enforcement. The claimant purchased land for redevelopment. The respondent seller of the land attempted to enforce a covenant aimed at restricting the use of land. It was held that in this case, only the Port of London Authority was entitled to enforce the covenant. | ||
| 590 | _aKA | ||
| 650 | 2 | 4 | _aCITY INN (JERSEY) V TEN TRINITY SQUARE |
| 651 | 4 |
_aUnited Kingdom _y |
|
| 690 | _aPROPERTY-PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 999 |
_c79003 _d79003 |
||