Russell v Archdale [1964] Ch 38
Property law – Restrictive covenants – Annexation of rights
Facts
A vendor company conveyed property which included barns and stables as part of the ‘Hedgerley Park estate’ to the defendant. The company retained adjoining and neighbouring land. The transfer contained restrictive covenants, including a prohibition on trade or business, expressed to benefit that retained land. The vendor subsequently sold part of the retained estate to the plaintiffs, who sought an injunction against the defendant’s business uses.
Issue
The court considered whether ‘adjoining and neighbouring land’ sufficiently identified the land intended to benefit from the covenants, and whether annexation to the estate as a whole passed the benefit to a purchaser of part. There was also a challenge brought on the basis that planning permission had been given for business uses on the land which might breach the covenant listed in the conveyance.
Law Teacher writing support
Writing a law essay?
We choose a writer who is an expert in your area of law and qualified to at least the academic level you select. Most of our writers hold a master’s degree or PhD, have teaching experience, or both.
Send us your question and, if you wish, any marking criteria. We’ll write an essay to your instructions.
Decision/Outcome
The court accepted ‘adjoining and neighbouring land’ as a sufficient description of the vendor’s retained land intended to benefit from the covenants. However, annexation to the estate as a whole did not itself annex the benefit to every separate part. Buckley J nevertheless granted the plaintiffs an injunction restraining specified business uses. Planning permission did not prevent those uses from breaching the private restrictive covenant.
