Businesses will be able to challenge supermarkets’ potentially uncompetitive land use restrictions – OUT-LAW.com

Posted June 21st, 2012 in competition, land registration, news, restrictive covenants by sally

“Businesses will be able to challenge land use restrictions put in place by major supermarkets to limit local competition from rival grocery outlets, the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has announced.”

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 20th June 2012

Source: www.out-law.com

Enforcement of post-termination restrictive covenants following Pirtek (UK) Ltd. v Joinplace Ltd & others [2010] EWHC 1641 (Ch) – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted May 1st, 2012 in competition, EC law, enforcement, news, restrictive covenants by sally

“As a result of the decision in Pirtek (UK) Ltd. v Joinplace Ltd & others [2010] EWHC 1641 (Ch), when considering the enforceability of a post-termination restrictive covenant against competition in a franchise agreement, there are now two things that have to be considered: the franchisor’s interest in having his goodwill in the franchise protected as a matter of common law; and, the franchisor’s interest in having his know-how and the assistance he has given his franchisee protected as a matter of Community law, as enacted in the UK by the Competition Act 1998?”

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 25th April 2012

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Canwell Estate Co Ltd v Smith Brothers Farms Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted March 6th, 2012 in appeals, law reports, rent, restrictive covenants by sally

Canwell Estate Co Ltd v Smith Brothers Farms Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 237; [2012] WLR (D) 59

“The prohibition introduced by the Rentcharges Act 1977 against creation of new rentcharges by a rent owner against a landowner did not apply to the creation of a rentcharge incorporated in a transfer made in 1990 the amount of which was calculated annually as a fixed proportion of the claimant’s costs, expenses and outgoings incurred in fulfilling its obligations under a covenant to cleanse, repair, maintain and as often as might be reasonably necessary renew, inter alia, all the roads on an estate, even though part of such service extended to land which was not owned by the party liable to pay the charge and to roads over which he had no right of way.”

WLR Daily, 2nd March 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Museum of Liverpool pays £750,000 for blocking view – BBC News

Posted February 24th, 2010 in compensation, news, restrictive covenants by sally

“Tourism bosses have been hit with a bill of £750,000 because the new Museum of Liverpool partially blocks the view from an iconic waterfront building.”

Full story

BBC News, 24th February 2010

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Reforming the law governing easements, covenants and profits à prendre – Law Commision

Posted March 28th, 2008 in consultations, easements, profits a prendre, restrictive covenants by sally

“On 28 March 2008 the Law Commission published a consultation paper provisionally proposing wide-ranging reform of the law governing easements, covenants and profits à prendre.”

Full consultation

Law Commission, 28th March 2008

Source: www.lawcom.gov.uk

Lawntown Ltd v Camenzuli and Another – Times Law Reports

Posted November 14th, 2007 in housing, law reports, restrictive covenants by sally

Court must not be swayed by council approval

Lawntown Ltd v Camenzuli and Another

Court of Appeal

“When exercising its discretion whether to vary a restrictive covenant to permit conversion of a single dwellinghouse into flats where planning permission had been granted, the court had to carry out its own balancing exercise and not be swayed by the fact that the planning authority had already granted permission.”

The Times, 14th November 2007

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Lawntown Ltd v Camenzuli and another – WLR Daily

Posted October 12th, 2007 in housing, law reports, restrictive covenants by sally

Lawntown Ltd v Camenzuli and another [2007] EWCA Civ 949

“Where the court was exercising its discretion under s 610(2) of the Housing Act 1985 to decide whether to vary a restrictive covenant to permit conversion of a single dwelling house into flats where planning permission had been granted there was no presumption, let alone duty, in favour of varying the covenant. It was left to the court to take account of all relevant factors and to carry out a balancing exercise, giving such weight as it judged appropriate to the various factors in the exercise of its discretion.”

WLR Daily, 10th October 2007

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.