header-logo header-logo

How builders can banish the covenant problem

01 June 2018 / Andrew Francis
Issue: 7795 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail
nlj_7795_francis

As demand for housing rises, lawyers are deploying s 84 applications to overcome the barrier of restrictive covenants. Andrew Francis offers advice

  • Discharging or modifying restrictive covenants over freehold land. Using s 84(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925.
  • Why this is a useful jurisdiction now.

The importance of the jurisdiction under s 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925 cannot be overestimated. The government’s housing and new national planning policy framework seeks to release land for much needed housing. There is a new Garden City movement supported by the government. As it is economic to develop to a greater intensity, a policy generally favoured under planning law, land values warrant steps being taken to remove covenant problems. Finally, there has been a growth in the re-use of sites where obsolescent houses are suitable for demolition with either replacement houses, or a greater number of houses, or flats being built.

The barriers

In this context, restrictive covenants often act as a barrier to the carrying out of the

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

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll