Heading

Case No: LC-2024-518
AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 84 OF THE LAW OF PROPERTY
ACT 1925
13 August 2025
TRIBUNALS, COURTS AND ENFORCEMENT ACT 2007
RESTRICTIVE COVENANT – DISCHARGE OR MODIFICATION – planning consent for erection of new dwelling - access, parking and garden on application land – restriction preventing erection of buildings or structures and use other than as a private garden for domestic recreation – easement for access limited to purposes in connection with use as a private garden for domestic recreation – application refused
BETWEEN:
LESLEY ANN GARTON
Applicant
-and-
WHEATCROFT LAND (THOROTON) LIMITED
AND SIX OTHERS
Objectors
Land to the rear of Manor House, Main Street,
Thoroton, Nottingham
NG13 9DS
Mrs D Martin TD MRICS FAAV
Nottingham Civil Justice Centre
4 June 2025
Mr Mark Diggle, instructed by direct access for the applicant
Mr Richard Power, instructed by Knights, for the objectors
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025
The following cases are referred to in this decision:
Hotchkin v McDonald [2004] 1 P&CR 7
Re O’Byrne’s Application [2018] UKUT 395 (LC)
Shephard v Turner [2006] 2 P & CR 28
The Ridgeway (Oxshott) Management Ltd v McGuiness, unreported, 24/8/23, HHJ Monty KC
- Heading
- Introduction
- Factual background and chronology
- Legal background
- The restriction and limited right of way
- Submissions on the Tribunal’s jurisdiction to modify the limited right of way
- The application for discharge or modification of the restriction
- Ground (a) - Obsolescence
- Ground (aa) – Whether in impeding a reasonable use the restriction secures practical benefits of substantial value or advantage to the objectors and, if not substantial, whether money would be an adeq
- Ground (c) – Discharge or modification would cause no injury to the persons entitled to the benefit of the restriction
- Conclusions
![[2025] UKUT 00253 (LC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_lnJS4Uj.png)