Freehold Covenants 2. The covenant must accommodate the domina
tenement
• Covenants = equitable interests in land. ‒ Original covenantee and successors in title m
• Positive covenants can never be an interest in land. retained an interest in the land at the time th
• Negative covenants may be an equitable interest in land. was made.
LCC v Allen: LCC did not own any land therefo
Enforcement between original parties while in possession interest in the land.
• Can be enforced by the usual rules of contract law. ‒ Covenant must touch and concern the land. C
personal interests, needs to be for the benefi
Formalities and utility of the land. This is a question of su
form.
S53(1)(a) LPA: must be in writing AND signed by the grantor
Cosmichome v Southampton CC
‒ Servient land and dominant land must be suff
Transferring the BURDEN in EQUITY proximate.
Bailey v Stephens: needs to be reasonably clo
Tulk v Mox hay : other. Need not be adjacent, although usually is.
3. The original parties must have intended for th
1. The covenant must be negative run
- Hand in pocket test: Haywood v Brunswick - Can be expressly stated in the wording of the
- Mixed covenants: - If not express, will be implied under s79 LPA 1
Separate positive and negative (Shepherd Homes v Sandham)
OR
Positive/negative as a whole (Powell Hemsley).
tenement
• Covenants = equitable interests in land. ‒ Original covenantee and successors in title m
• Positive covenants can never be an interest in land. retained an interest in the land at the time th
• Negative covenants may be an equitable interest in land. was made.
LCC v Allen: LCC did not own any land therefo
Enforcement between original parties while in possession interest in the land.
• Can be enforced by the usual rules of contract law. ‒ Covenant must touch and concern the land. C
personal interests, needs to be for the benefi
Formalities and utility of the land. This is a question of su
form.
S53(1)(a) LPA: must be in writing AND signed by the grantor
Cosmichome v Southampton CC
‒ Servient land and dominant land must be suff
Transferring the BURDEN in EQUITY proximate.
Bailey v Stephens: needs to be reasonably clo
Tulk v Mox hay : other. Need not be adjacent, although usually is.
3. The original parties must have intended for th
1. The covenant must be negative run
- Hand in pocket test: Haywood v Brunswick - Can be expressly stated in the wording of the
- Mixed covenants: - If not express, will be implied under s79 LPA 1
Separate positive and negative (Shepherd Homes v Sandham)
OR
Positive/negative as a whole (Powell Hemsley).
