Bath Rugby Ltd v Greenwood and others [2021] EWCA Civ 1927
A 1922 restrictive covenant was unenforceable as it did not clearly identify the land intended to be benefited by it.
A 1922 restrictive covenant was unenforceable as it did not clearly identify the land intended to be benefited by it.
Facts
The appellant (BR) held a long lease of part of an area of land known as “the Rec”, from which it operated a famous rugby club. The Rec was subject to a covenant contained in a conveyance dated 6 April 1922 (the Covenant) under which the original purchasers covenanted for themselves and their successors and assigns with the original vendor and his successors in title and assigns that:
“…no workshops warehouses factories or other buildings for the purpose of any trade or business which may be or grow to be a nuisance annoyance or disturbance or otherwise prejudicially affect the adjoining premises or the neighbourhood shall at any time hereafter be erected upon the said hereditaments and premises…”.
BR wanted to replace its existing stadium with a new, larger stadium incorporating various retail and commercial outlets, with associated car parking. It accepted that if the Covenant was still enforceable, its proposed new development might breach the Covenant. However, it argued that there was no-one who could show that they had the benefit of the Covenant. It brought a claim under section 84(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925 for declarations that, in effect, the Rec was free from the Covenant.
Two of the defendants claimed to own land that benefited from the Covenant (a flat overlooking the Rec and a house of which the flat formed part).
Issue
Did the 1922 conveyance sufficiently identify the land to which the benefit of the Covenant was intended to be annexed (in the absence of express assignment or a building scheme, annexation is the way that the benefit of a covenant passes in equity)?
Decision
For the benefit of a covenant to be annexed to land, it must be taken for the protection of defined land (so that it passes with ownership of the land). In this case, the covenant was deemed to be for the benefit of the ‘neighbourhood’ and this was insufficient. While it is common for covenants preventing nuisance to refer to a ‘neighbourhood’, that term did not sufficiently identify the land to which the benefit of the covenant was intended to be annexed (it refers not to particular properties, but to a local area).
This meant that the benefit of the Covenant had not been annexed to land and that there was therefore no one who could now enforce the Covenant.
Points to note/consider
- Two of the three judges in this case thought that not only must a conveyance identify the land to be benefited by a covenant, but also that the benefited land had to be ‘easily ascertainable’ at the time it was entered into (the third judge thought it was sufficient for the conveyance to describe the land intended to be benefited in terms which enabled it to be identified from other evidence). Either way, when entering into new restrictive covenants, this case emphasises the need to clearly and accurately identify the land intended to benefit from those covenants.
- In older conveyances, it is common to see restrictive covenants taken to benefit “the Vendor’s adjoining or neighbouring land” (or words to that effect). Whilst that phrase is probably conceptually certain (unlike ‘neighbourhood’), it may still be hard for anyone seeking to enforce such a covenant now to prove that the land that they own originally formed part of such “adjoining or neighbouring land”.
Contact

David Harris
Professional Development Lawyer
david.harris@brownejacobson.com
+44 (0)115 934 2019
Related expertise
You may be interested in...
Press Release
UK and Ireland law firm Browne Jacobson joins UKREiiF 2023
Legal Update
Biodiversity Net Gain — Government publishes consultation response
Opinion
‘Awaab’s Law’- a significant amendment to the Social Housing Regulation Bill
Press Release
Browne Jacobson’s real estate specialists advise Chesterfield Borough Council on prestigious new development - One Waterside Place
Opinion
Will fixed recoverable costs in housing conditions claims see the light of day?
Legal Update
J A Ball Limited (in Administration) v St Philips Homes (Courthaulds) Ltd
Opinion
“A Modern Nuisance”
Press Release
Browne Jacobson advise High Peak Borough Council on future high street funded acquisition as part of Buxton regeneration vision
Opinion
Supreme court rules on retail tenant's service charge bill
Guide
2023: Horizon scanning in construction
Legal Update
The importance of understanding the transitional provisions under the Electronic Communications Code
Legal Update
Biodiversity Net Gain: positive for nature and an opportunity for landowners
On-Demand
The UK's green agenda - the outcomes of COP27 and actions since COP26
Legal Update
Hillside – the end of drop in applications?
On 2 November 2022, the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in the much awaiting case of Hillside Parks Ltd v Snowdonia National Park Authority [2022] UKSC 30. The Court’s judgment suggests that the long established practice of using drop-in applications is in fact much more restricted than previously thought. This judgment therefore has significant implications for both the developers and local planning authorities.
Press Release
Browne Jacobson’s retail lawyers advise Wilko on its strategic £48m sale and leaseback of Nottinghamshire distribution centre to DHL
National law firm Browne Jacobson has advised long standing retail client, Wilko on the sale and leaseback of its Nottinghamshire distribution centre in Worksop to logistics specialist DHL for £48m.
Press Release
Former Mace Group Legal Director joins Browne Jacobson as Non-Executive Director of its Construction & Real Estate sector
Browne Jacobson has appointed Amy Chapman, the former Group Legal Director of global built environment experts Mace Group, as its first Non-Executive Director (NED) of its Construction & Real Estate sector strategy board.
Press Release
Browne Jacobson advises Bromley Council on the first social housing initiative of its kind to tackle homelessness
Opinion
Rent arrears post-Covid: What are the landlord’s options?
Since the beginning of the pandemic, landlords and tenants have experienced significant limitations in the way rent arrears could be pursued. We first saw the moratorium on the recovery of Covid related arrears, and more recently we’ve experienced the implementation of the Covid arrears arbitration scheme.
Press Release
Browne Jacobson appoints its first Non-Executive to Chair to support its corporate sector strategy board
Legal Update
IUA publishes cladding remediation clause
Legal Update
Regeneration funding: Securing Compulsory Purchase Orders in the face of escalating building costs
The focus on the Levelling Up agenda and the availability of grant funding, means there are numerous important regeneration schemes actively being pursued across the country. With ever-escalating project and building costs, in many cases, applications that were made for grant funding were based on costs contingencies that have already been exceeded.
Published Article
RAAC planks and its impact on local authorities
Recent reports of flat roofs constructed using RAAC planks collapsing without warning prompted the SCOSS alert.
Legal Update
Conservation Covenants – what are they and how will they affect you?
Conservation Covenants come into force on 30 September 2022. We look at the impact on landowners, developers and responsible bodies.
Published Article
The Building Safety Act 2022: Navigating building liability orders
The Building Safety Act 2022 received Royal Assent on 28 April 2022 (“Act”). The government has described the reforms introduced by the Act as “the biggest changes to building safety regulation in a generation”. For once the hype is justified.
Published Article
Sustainability in construction
The climate emergency has reached a point where real and substantial damage is being caused to both the planet and society. There has been a shift from planning and theorising the most effective solutions, to a phase where practical, efficient, and sustainable solutions are required at speed.
Opinion
Responding to Grenfell – Slow progress is better than none
As the Grenfell Inquiry continues, how have the Phase 1 recommendations changed the fire safety and building safety landscape?
Legal Update
Balancing homelessness duties and housing stock: all change?
On 4 May 2022, the Court of Appeal handed down judgment in the joint case of R (Elkundi and others) -v- Birmingham City Council and R (Imam) -v- London Borough of Croydon [2022] EWCA Civ 601.
Published Article
Queen’s speech: planning reforms to be tackled via Levelling up Bill
This year’s Queen’s Speech has outlined several legislative changes and the overhauling of laws around levelling up, planning and economic crime that could affect conveyancers.
Legal Update
Is this the end of Section 106?
The Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill was introduced to Parliament on 11 May 2022. In this Bill, and in accordance with earlier reports, the government intends to replace section 106 agreements and the existing Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) with a new Infrastructure Levy.
On-Demand
Building Safety Bill – what’s coming and how will it affect you?
In anticipation of the adoption of the Building Safety Bill, our specialist compliance and regulatory team will give an overview of the measures proposed in the Bill.
Opinion
Building Safety Bill receives Royal Assent
The new regime introduced by the Act will take shape over the next 18 months, but those who design, build or manage high rise buildings are being urged to get ready for the changes to be introduced through the act.
Opinion
Update: building safety repairs pledge signed by over 35 major housing developers
On 14 February 2022, Secretary of State of the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, Michael Gove, announced proposals designed to pressure building developers and materials manufacturers to fund the remediation of unsafe properties.
Legal Update
Modernising the planning system
Improvement to the planning system has arrived in the form of new digital tools which will make it easier for the general public to have their say on shaping and regenerating their communities.
Opinion
Building Safety Bill amendments
In March the government proposed a number of changes to the Building Safety Bill. The new amendments propose additional protection for leaseholders to prevent them from being charged for cladding work if they own up to three properties.
Legal Update
SPS Groundworks & Building Ltd v Mahil [2022] EWHC 371 (QB)
A seller failed on an auction sale to comply with its common law duty to disclose an overage obligation affecting the property.
Legal Update
W (No.3) GP (Nominee A ) Ltd and another v J D Sports Fashion Plc (Nottingham County Court, 22 October 2021)
The County Court refuses the landlord’s request to include a turnover rent in a statutory lease renewal.
Legal Update
Brooke Homes (Bicester) Ltd v Portfolio Property Partners Ltd & Others [2021] EWHC 3015 (Ch)
The court provides some useful guidance on the different types of endeavours obligations and good faith clauses.
Legal Update
Ventgrove Ltd v Kuehne Nagel Ltd 2021 CSOH 129
A tenant in Scotland had validly exercised a break option even though it failed to pay VAT on the break premium.
Legal Update
Real estate quarterly update – January to March 2022
Read more about our latest real estate update aimed at in-house lawyers practising in the property and real estate sector.
Opinion
Draft Bill published to establish a Register of Overseas Entities
The Government has this week published the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill as part of its measures to crack down on foreign criminals using property in this country to launder money. The Bill proposes the establishment of a Register of Overseas Entities to be maintained by Companies House.