• news-banner

    Expert Insights

Top Ten Tips – Dealing with Restrictive Covenants

The recent case of Livett & Anor v Hennings & Anor [2022] has emphasised the potential issues in enforcing restrictive covenants and considerations in the event that land subject to covenant(s) is going to be developed. In this case the Upper Tribunal ruled that a number of individuals who were objecting to an application to modify or extinguish a restrictive covenant (not to build more than one dwelling per plot and not to cause a nuisance) could not show that they were entitled to the benefit of it (and, as such, had no entitlement to oppose). A timely reminder of the issues. We therefore set out our top ten tips for ensuring enforceability of a restrictive covenant, or how to seek to argue it is not, below:

To ensure that a covenant is enforceable

  1. Make sure that the drafting is clear and precise. In order for a restrictive covenant to bind the land (so that they remain enforceable when the property is sold) it must be restrictive in nature i.e., not allow something to be done, it must benefit other land, and the benefit must have been intended to run with that benefitting land. The covenant cannot merely be a covenant of personal benefit to the original party.

  2. It should be clear which land benefits from the restrictive covenant and which land is burdened by it. We suggest using plans (even where the covenant is drafted on the basis that it benefits e.g., the “retained land”) as title numbers may change over time. The plans need to show all the benefitting and burdened land.

  3. When registering the restrictive covenant, the application must be made against both the benefitting and burdened land. You should also make sure it is registered against the correct land (we have seen many instances where restrictive covenants are registered against e.g., the whole of a title when it should only be part of it)

     

When developing land which is subject to a restrictive covenant

  1. Do not ignore restrictive covenants. They are put in place for a reason and beneficiaries will often seek to enforce them. A good way to flush out whether there is going to be an issue with a restrictive covenant is via the planning process.

  2. Where it may first appear that a restrictive covenant does not affect your development (e.g. a covenant that restricts the operation of a pub, inn, tavern and any other business that sells or supplies alcohol from the property), double check! Even if the intention is that the development is residential there might be commercial units intended to be constructed which could potentially be sterilised by the covenant.

  3. Scrutinise the terms carefully. The covenant may have expired (if time limited) or at some point the benefitting and burdening land could have come into common ownership. As such the covenant may no longer be enforceable.

  4. If it looks like a restrictive covenant is enforceable and is going to be breached by development, seek to obtain a restrictive covenant title indemnity insurance policy to cover any loss from a claim from a beneficiary. You should insure the full gross development value of the property affected.

  5. Consider an application to the lands chamber of the upper tribunal (under s84 of the Law of Property 1925) to seek to modify or extinguish the restrictive covenant. As the developer sought to do in Livett. You must satisfy one of the following grounds:

    a) The covenant is obsolete because either the character of the property or the neighbourhood has changed or there is another circumstance with the tribunal may deem material in making it obsolete.

    b) The covenant impedes a reasonable user of the land (or would do if it remains unmodified).

    c) Those with the benefit of the covenant have agreed to discharge or modify it.

    d) Discharge or modification of the covenant would not injure the beneficiaries of it.

  6. If the restrictive covenant is “qualified”, such that the thing which is prohibited may be done with “consent” of the relevant beneficiaries, you could seek consent. However, there is no guarantee consent will be provided and it can often be difficult to obtain the consent of all of the beneficiaries. We advise caution in this approach as contact with the beneficiaries may make insurance difficult to obtain.

  7. If insurance isn’t available, a beneficiary may agree to release the land from the burden of the restrictive covenant. Beneficiaries request significant sums of money for such a release. But it could be the only option to allow development to proceed.

Our thinking

  • Next Gen Rural Professionals Drinks Reception

    Events

  • HM Land Registry's Digital Drive - Delays Persist but perhaps there is light at the end of the tunnel?

    Maisy-Jane Cook

    Quick Reads

  • The Financial Times and Daily Mail quote Emma Humphreys on the impact of the UK Government's Spending Review on housebuilding targets

    Emma Humphreys

    In the Press

  • Planning essentials case update: what changes can I make to my listed building?

    Sadie Pitman

    Quick Reads

  • Sowing doubt: slashing green farm funding is a risk we can't afford

    Maddie Dunn

    Quick Reads

  • Can a contractor adjudicate to recover outstanding retention monies from the employer’s assignee?

    Kate Knox

    Insights

  • HS2 - still no sign of a train leaving the station

    Richard Flenley

    Quick Reads

  • Please, sir, I want some more… consideration for your MSV survey

    Samuel Lear

    Quick Reads

  • Charles Russell Speechlys continues to grow with hire of Real Estate Planning expert Josh Risso-Gill

    Robin Grove MIoL

    News

  • Planning for life sciences: an update

    Sophie Willis

    Quick Reads

  • Q&A: Two good, too bad

    Harriet Durn

    Insights

  • Q&A: Legal title on land occupied since 1986

    Emma Preece

    Insights

  • Supreme Court’s Ruling in Building Safety Case: URS Corporation Ltd v BDW Trading Ltd

    James Worthington

    Insights

  • Government publishes consultation on Regulations about how rent is calculated under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 for agreements with Code operators

    Georgina Muskett

    Quick Reads

  • Estates Gazette quotes Claire Fallows on the 'Great North' initiative launched at this year's UKREiiF

    Claire Fallows

    In the Press

  • A range of property and construction titles quote David Savage on the case of URS v BDW Trading in the Supreme Court

    David Savage

    In the Press

  • Successors in title bound by predecessors’ boundary demarcation agreement, notwithstanding lack of knowledge

    Emma Preece

    Quick Reads

  • UK Real Estate Opportunities for Asia Capital

    Simon Green

    Events

  • BBC News quotes Emma Preece on a Supreme Court decision around whether people can camp in certain areas of Dartmoor without permission from landowners

    Emma Preece

    In the Press

  • Property Patter: Applications to discharge or modify restrictions

    Emma Humphreys

    Podcasts

Back to top