Clarion Housing Association Limited v VC Chitty & Ors
[2024] UKUT 187 (LC)
Staffordshire County Council v Residents of the Roe Lane Farm Housing Estate
14 June 2024
[2024] UKUT 174 (LC)
Upper Tribunal
The council wanted to build houses on an old school. Neighbours didn't want them to. The court said the rules stopping them building were old and didn't really help the neighbours, so the council could build the houses.
Key Facts
- •Staffordshire County Council applied to discharge restrictive covenants preventing residential development on the site of a former school.
- •The school was demolished, and planning permission for 55 houses was granted.
- •Objectors were residents of a nearby housing estate, concerned about the loss of potential educational facilities and potential access/safety issues.
- •The objectors were not represented at the hearing.
Legal Principles
Section 84(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925 provides grounds for discharging or modifying restrictive covenants.
Law of Property Act 1925, Section 84(1)
To discharge a covenant under s.84(1)(a), material changes in the character of the property, neighbourhood, or other circumstances must render the restriction obsolete.
Law of Property Act 1925, Section 84(1)(a)
To discharge a covenant under s.84(1)(aa), the restriction must impede reasonable land use, secure no practical benefits of substantial value, and compensation can address any loss.
Law of Property Act 1925, Section 84(1)(aa)
To discharge a covenant under s.84(1)(c), the discharge must not injure those entitled to the benefit of the restriction.
Law of Property Act 1925, Section 84(1)(c)
Planning permission is strongly persuasive in considering whether a land use is reasonable.
Re Hextall’s Application (1998) 79 P&CR 382
For a restriction to secure a practical benefit, the benefit must result directly from observing the restriction's terms.
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council v Alwiyah Developments (1986) 52 P&CR
A negative covenant cannot be used to achieve a positive result.
James Hall and Company (Property Limited) v Maugham and Ors [2017] UKUT 240 (LC)
Section 84 applications involve a two-stage process: jurisdictional (grounds established) and discretionary (exercise of power).
Alexander Devine Children's Cancer Trust v Housing Solutions Ltd [2020] UKSC 45
Outcomes
The application to discharge the restrictive covenants was granted.
The Tribunal found that the covenants were obsolete (ground (a)), secured no practical benefits to the objectors (ground (aa)), and would not injure the objectors (ground (c)). The objectors' arguments lacked sufficient evidence and were based on a misunderstanding of the legal principles.