Pinewood Estate [1958] Ch 280

Key point
  • There is no fourth way of transferring the benefit of restrictive covenants outside of annexation, assignment and building scheme
Facts
  • An estate was originally subject to a building scheme imposed by the vendor
  • The purchasers were unsatisfied with the restrictions
  • The purchasers executed a mutual deed of covenant that stated that existing covenants were to be removed and replaced by new covenants
Held (High Court)
  • The purported covenants did not take effect
Wynn-Parry J
  • The pre-existing building scheme was brought to an end by the deed
  • There are 3 ways of running the benefit, none are present
    1. a building scheme,
    2. any annexation by proper words of annexation, or
    3. any complete chain of assignments
  • But D argues that she is entitled to benefit as the provisions of the deed show that the parties should be mutually bound which allows the transfer of benefit
  • However, there is no 4th way to transfer the benefit of a restrictive covenant
Scroll to top