header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
03 January 2019 / Steven Gasztowicz KC
Issue: 7822 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

A legal history of Leicester Square

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

​Steven Gasztowicz QC marks the 170th birthday of Tulk v Moxhay

  • Tulk v Moxhay (1848) and the birth of restrictive covenants.
  • An examination, 170 years later, of some of the human and historical aspects of the case – and the way they have affected the law – and Leicester Square in London.

Can a case have a birthday? Well, no, not really, of course. However, 22 December 2018 marked the 170th anniversary of the decision of the Lord Chancellor in Tulk v Moxhay (1848) SC 2 PH 774, [1843-60] All ER Rep 9.

This is the celebrated case which is seen as representing the birth of restrictive covenants in English land law, so the reference to birthdays is not entirely inappropriate.

Restrictive covenants are, of course, contractual promises not to use land in a particular way, which are enforceable not just against present, but also against future, owners and occupiers of the land. You do not have to be a land lawyer to appreciate the human and historical side

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

Read All
Sponsored by
NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: When post-breach events rewrite damages claims
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
NLJ this week: Supreme Court redraws unfair prejudice rules
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll