header-logo header-logo

Bath Rugby win at home

04 February 2022 / Andrew Francis
Issue: 7965 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail
71042
Victory in the Court of Appeal: Andrew Francis tackles the enforceability of covenants
  • Following the Court of Appeal’s decision in Bath Rugby Ltd v Greenwood, this article looks at the problem of deciding whether a covenant can be enforceable by anyone who claims the benefit of it and who is not the original covenantee.

To adapt the words of a onetime resident at Bath, it is a truth universally acknowledged by real property lawyers that in order to be of any practical value, a restrictive covenant affecting freehold land must have an enforcing party.

To decide whether a covenant achieves that status can be difficult. The trickiest part of the analysis of a covenant is not always its meaning, or whether it binds anyone, but whether anyone can enforce it. Over more than two centuries, the courts have devised rules about how the burden of a covenant may run and also working out how the right to enforce (‘the benefit’) of a covenant may be claimed; in each case, with

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll