Heading

Case No: LC-2022-597
AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 84 OF THE LAW OF PROPERTY ACT 1925
Royal Courts of Justice
15 March 2024
TRIBUNALS, COURTS AND ENFORCEMENT ACT 2007
RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS – modification – proposed extensions to terrace of houses -covenant preventing alteration of external appearance of houses – whether covenant secured practical benefits of substantial value or advantage – s.84(1) (aa) and (c), Law of Property Act 1925 – application refused
BETWEEN:
RAKESH PATEL AND OTHERS
Applicants
-and-
LIAM PHILIP SPENDER AND 103 OTHERS (1)
FIT NOMINEE LIMITED AND FIT NOMINEE 2 LTD (2)
Objectors
4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22 and 24 Ferry Street,
London, E14 3DT
Upper Tribunal Judge Elizabeth Cooke and Mr Mark Higgin FRICS FIRRV
30 January – 2 February 2024
Decision date:
Mr Stephen Jourdan KC and Mr Michael Ranson for the applicants, instructed by Brethertons LLP
Mr Liam Spender for the objectors
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2024
The following cases are referred to in this decision:
C & G Homes Ltd v Secretary of State for Health [1991] Ch 365
Duval v 11 – 13 Randolph Crescent Limited [2020] AC 845
Martin v Lipton [2020] UKUT 8 (LC)
Morris v Brookmans Park Roads Ltd [2021] UKUT 125 (LC)
Re Bass (1973) 26 P & CR 156
Ridley v Taylor [1965] 1 WLR 611
Shephard v Turner [2006] EWCA Civ 8
- Heading
- Introduction
- The facts
- The statutory background
- The applicants, the application and the open offer
- The application
- The open offer
- The objectors’ cases
- Does the covenant impede a reasonable use of the applicants’ land?
- Does the covenant, in impeding that reasonable use, secure practical benefits to the objectors? If so, are those benefits of substantial value or advantage?
- The prevention of increased nuisance from the occupants of HMOs
- The preventions of additional strain on the estate services and the service charges
- Damage to the trees at the back of the application houses
- Overlooking from the new balconies
- The change to the architecture of the development
- The breach in the building scheme and the risk of further development in the future
- Disturbance from the work done to carry the proposed projects
- Discretion
- Conclusions
![[2024] UKUT 62 (LC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_lnJS4Uj.png)