Restrictive covenants

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis

A restrictive covenant requires the covenantor not to do something, whether that is building or using the land for particular purposes. Unlike 'positive' covenants, the burden of a restrictive covenant is capable of 'running with the land', so that successive owners or occupiers are bound by the restriction.

Covenants restricting the use of land imposed by a seller may be divided into three classes:

  1. •

    covenants imposed for the seller’s own benefit

  2. •

    covenants imposed as owner of other land, of which the land sold formed a part, and intended to protect or benefit the unsold land

  3. •

    covenants on a sale of land to various buyers who, with their respective successors in title, are intended mutually to enjoy the benefit of, and be bound by, the covenants

The first category of covenants is personal to the seller and only enforceable by them, unless expressly assigned.

The second category ‘run’ with the land and are enforceable without express assignment by the owner for the time being of the land for the benefit of which they were imposed.

The third category is most usually

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Existing user? Sign-in TAKE A FREE TRIAL
Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Property Disputes News

Property Disputes weekly highlights—3 April 2025

This week's edition of Property Disputes weekly highlights includes: a Court of Appeal decision on residential service charges, Upper Tribunal decisions concerning the jurisdiction to vary management orders, an application for first registration of land based on adverse possession, and a rating case on property incapable of beneficial occupation, and High Court decisions concerning the personal nature of the appointment of a receiver, and enforcement of a non-moratorium debt during a moratorium period. It also includes an analysis of the first-ever building liability order and information orders awarded under the Building Safety Act 2022 and the HM Courts and Tribunals Service announcement of the centralisation of combined writ of control applications to the Civil National Business Centre.

First-ever building liability order and information orders awarded under Building Safety Act 2022 (381 Southwark Park Road v Click)

Construction analysis: In March 2025, a transcript of the first (and to date, only) judgment awarding a building liability order (BLO) under the Building Safety Act 2022 (BSA 2022) became available. That judgment was given ex tempore by Jefford J at a consequential hearing (BLO Judgment) following trial in 381 Southwark Park Road RTM Company Ltd v Click St Andrews Ltd [2024] EWHC 3179 (TCC) (Trial Judgment). At the consequential hearing, Mrs Justice Jefford also awarded the claimants the first (and to date, only) Information Orders under BSA 2022, s 132. The Information Orders were made against multiple parties, including the defendants at trial and a third party subsidiary suspected of receiving assets at an undervalue from within the same corporate group. A far-reaching order was granted including full details of the consideration given in respect of share ownership in the subsidiary, the personal benefits received by the holding company’s shareholders and full details of the subsidiary’s current financial position. (The Information Orders judgment was transcribed separately and is expected to be published imminently.) Written by Michael Levenstein, barrister at Gatehouse Chambers and member of Lexis+ Construction’s Consulting Editorial Board, who acted for the successful claimants.

Property Disputes weekly highlights—27 March 2025

This week's edition of Property Disputes weekly highlights includes: coverage of the Spring Statement 2025, Upper Tribunal decisions concerning costs in the First-tier Tribunal and clarification on the statutory test for a ‘self-contained part of building’ in right to manage claims, High Court decisions concerning an application to strike out a claim and/or for summary judgment and a dispute arising from a freezing injunction prohibiting disposal or diminution of certain assets. It also includes the commencement of the 182nd Practice Direction, which came into force on 20 March 2025 and the minutes of the CPR Committee’s meeting of 7 February 2025.

Built environment industry responses to the Spring Statement 2025

Following the publication of the Spring Statement on 26 March 2025, several built environment industry bodies have released their responses.

View Property Disputes by content type :  
News
Practice notes
Precedents
Q&As

Popular documents

Establishing and maintaining rights of light

Establishing and maintaining rights of lightThis Practice Note considers when and how a right of light can be established, whether through grant or prescription (a prescriptive right of light is most commonly established under the Prescription Act 1832), and considers when a right of light might be

There is a restrictive covenant noted on a registered title, and the covenant was created in 1966 before

There is a restrictive covenant noted on a registered title, and the covenant was created in 1966 before registration of the land in 1980. If a land charges search reveals that the covenant is not registered as a class D(ii) land charge against the original covenantor, does that mean it should never

An individual has had uninterrupted use of land for over 20 years but the use is then interrupted for a

An individual has had uninterrupted use of land for over 20 years but the use is then interrupted for a significant period (3–4 years). Would this interruption defeat a claim for a prescriptive easement? If it would not, is there a time limit within which the claim must be brought from the date of

If a lease excludes section 62 of the Law of Property Act 1925, does this prevent a leaseholder from

If a lease excludes section 62 of the Law of Property Act 1925, does this prevent a leaseholder from acquiring a right to light?The benefit of a right to light already acquired by the landlord at the date of grant of the lease (or in the process of being acquired by the landlord) can be passed to a
Establishing and maintaining rights of light

Establishing and maintaining rights of light

Establishing and maintaining rights of lightThis Practice Note considers when and how a right of light can be established, whether through grant or prescription (a prescriptive right of light is most commonly established under the Prescription Act 1832), and considers when a right of light might be

There is a restrictive covenant noted on a registered title, and the covenant was created in 1966 before

There is a restrictive covenant noted on a registered title, and the covenant was created in 1966 before

There is a restrictive covenant noted on a registered title, and the covenant was created in 1966 before registration of the land in 1980. If a land charges search reveals that the covenant is not registered as a class D(ii) land charge against the original covenantor, does that mean it should never

An individual has had uninterrupted use of land for over 20 years but the use is then interrupted for a

An individual has had uninterrupted use of land for over 20 years but the use is then interrupted for a

An individual has had uninterrupted use of land for over 20 years but the use is then interrupted for a significant period (3–4 years). Would this interruption defeat a claim for a prescriptive easement? If it would not, is there a time limit within which the claim must be brought from the date of

If a lease excludes section 62 of the Law of Property Act 1925, does this prevent a leaseholder from

If a lease excludes section 62 of the Law of Property Act 1925, does this prevent a leaseholder from

If a lease excludes section 62 of the Law of Property Act 1925, does this prevent a leaseholder from acquiring a right to light?The benefit of a right to light already acquired by the landlord at the date of grant of the lease (or in the process of being acquired by the landlord) can be passed to a