header-logo header-logo

27 July 2012 / Dean Bedford
Issue: 7524 / Categories: Features , Environment , Property
printer mail-detail

Arrested development?

rexfeatures_1760344a_4

Conserving history or restricting the future? Dean Bedford puts the National Trust under the spotlight

The benefit of a restrictive covenant attaches to land and can be enforced by successive owners of that land provided certain well-rehearsed conditions are met. However, s 8 of the National Trust Act 1937 enables the National Trust to enforce restrictive covenants without needing to satisfy all these criteria.  This can cause headaches for property developers by removing a developer’s ability to take an informed legal view on the risk posed by a covenant before committing to a project or, giving them little opportunity to defend themselves in the usual way. In the event of enforcement by the Trust developers have struggled to obtain modification or release of covenants in the Upper Tribunal because the injury caused to the Trust cannot be quantified in monetary terms. However, Re Thames Valley Holdings Ltd (2011) LTL 30/8/2011, [2011] UKUT 325 (LC) offers a ray of opportunity to developers looking to utilise land burdened by National Trust covenants.

Restrictive convenants

Thames

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll