Appellants conveying land subject to restrictive covenant relating to “settled estate” within meaning of Settled Land Act 1925 — Appellants rearranging family affairs — Whether rearrangements disabling restrictive covenant — Appeal dismissed
The proceedings concerned the Cadogan family estates that had been settled on trusts under the Settled Land Act 1925. Some of the land was conveyed to the local authority. The conveyance included a covenant that provided, inter alia, that the purchasers and their successors in title were restricted to using the land for the housing of the “working classes”, on condition that land adjacent to the site still formed part of the “Cadogan Settled Estate”.
The respondent purchased a part of the conveyed land with the intention of erecting housing. It sought a declaration that the restriction on the property was not enforceable on the ground that the rearrangement of the Cadogan family affairs, since the settlement of the estate, meant that there was no longer a “Cadogan Settled Estate” within the meaning of the restrictive covenant. The judge granted the declaration, and the appellants appealed, claiming that he had misconstrued the terms of the covenant.
Held: The appeal was dismissed.
The covenant was clear in its terms. On its natural meaning, it had been intended that the covenant would be enforceable only for the benefit of land continuing to form part of an identifiable estate. The fact that the covenant described the land as the “Cadogan Settled Estate” indicated that it referred to the settlement as it had existed at the time of the conveyance, and not to some subsequent altered settlement.
Elizabeth Appleby QC and Toby Davey (instructed by Pemberton Greenish) appeared for the appellants; Michael Barnes QC and Rupert Reed (instructed by Gouldens) appeared for the respondents.
Vivienne Lane, barrister
