* not completed

. Which one of the following statements is TRUE?

The presence of indemnity covenants between the original covenantor and his successor in title enables the covenantee to pursue the successor in title directly correct incorrect

An original covenantor can only be sued by a covenantee where he has entered into an indemnity covenant with his successor in title correct incorrect

Where an original covenantor is pursued for a successor in title's breach, the presence of an indemnity covenant between himself and his successor in title will enable him to claim indemnification from his successor in title correct incorrect

Indemnity covenants arise automatically in transactions between an original freehold covenantor and his successor in title correct incorrect

* not completed

. Which one of the following is NOT a requirement under Tulk v Moxhay (1848)?

The covenant must be negative in nature. correct incorrect

The covenant must accommodate the dominant land. correct incorrect

At the time of creation the original parties must have intended for the benefit to pass with the servient land. correct incorrect

The purchaser of the servient land must have had notice of the covenant. correct incorrect

* not completed

. Which one of the following statements is FALSE in respect of passing the benefit by annexation in equity?

Annexation transfers the benefit of a covenant to a successor in title of the dominant land personally and thus must occur upon every subsequent transfer of the dominant land. correct incorrect

Annexation occurs at the time that the covenant is originally created. correct incorrect

Annexation may be express, implied, or by statute. correct incorrect

A successor in title to the dominant land may claim to benefit from a covenant that has passed by way of annexation provided the covenant is one that touches and concerns the land. correct incorrect

* not completed

. For the benefit of a covenant to pass at common law, which one of the following is NOT a requirement under P&A Swift Investments v Combined English Stores Group plc (1989)?

The covenant must touch and concern the dominant land. correct incorrect

The original parties must have intended for the benefit to pass. correct incorrect

The original covenantee and his successor must have held / hold a legal estate in the dominant land. correct incorrect

The successor to the original covenantee must have had notice of the covenant. correct incorrect

* not completed

. Which one of the following statements is TRUE?

For a covenant to be seen to accommodate the dominant land, the dominant and servient lands must be adjacent to one another correct incorrect

A covenant which affects the value of the dominant land or its mode of occupation or use, may be seen to touch and concern that land correct incorrect

A covenant not to allow a boundary wall to fall into a state of disrepair is a negative covenant correct incorrect

It will always be implied that the original covenanting parties intended for the burden of a covenant to pass correct incorrect

* not completed

. Which one of the following statements is TRUE in respect of the requirement of notice under Tulk v Moxhay (1848)?

A giftee of unregistered land will be deemed to have notice of a post-1925 restrictive covenant even where it has not been registered as a Class D(ii) land charge. correct incorrect

A purchaser of registered land may be deemed to have notice of a restrictive covenant, not entered as a notice on the charges register, by virtue of it amounting to an overriding interest under Sch 3 para 2. correct incorrect

A purchaser of registered land may escape having notice of a restrictive covenant where he successfully overreaches that covenant. correct incorrect

A purchaser of unregistered land will be deemed to have notice of a pre-1925 restrictive covenant only where he has actual knowledge of its existence. correct incorrect

* not completed

. Which one of the following statements is TRUE?

The burden of a positive covenant can never be enforced directly against a successor in title to the original covenantor. correct incorrect

The burden of a positive covenant can be enforced against the original covenantor and his successor in title where indemnity covenants exist. correct incorrect

The burden of a positive covenant can only be enforced using common law and only directly against the successor in title to the original covenantor where the requirements under Halsall v Brizell (1957) are met. correct incorrect

The burden of a positive covenant can be enforced against a successor in title to the original covenantor in equity where annexation can be established. correct incorrect

* not completed

. Which one of the following is the authority which first established statutory annexation for the passing of the benefit in equity?

Federated Homes Ltd v Mill Lodge Properties Ltd (1980) correct incorrect

P&A Swift Investments v Combined English Stores Group plc (1989) correct incorrect

LCC v Allen (1914) correct incorrect

Rhone v Stephens (1994) correct incorrect

* not completed

. Which one of the following is a method by which the benefit of a covenant may pass at common law?

By operation of s62 LPA 1925. correct incorrect

By way of assignment, whether express or implied. correct incorrect

By virtue of the successor in title to the dominant land having notice of the covenant. correct incorrect

By way of a scheme of development. correct incorrect

* not completed

. Under which statutory section may a person apply for a restrictive covenant to be discharged or modified?

Section 78 LPA 1925 correct incorrect

Section 79 LPA 1925 correct incorrect

Section 84 LPA 1925 correct incorrect

Section 56 LPA 1925 correct incorrect

* not completed

. Sarah owned a large registered estate and last year he sold half of the garden to Romulus who wanted to build a house on it. The sale included the following covenants.
i) The property would only be used for residential purposes.
ii) Rachel would contribute 10% towards the upkeep of a shared pathway to the garden.
Sunil has sold his land to Claudia and Rachel has now sold his land to Peter. Peter has turned the house into a small hotel. He also refuses to contribute to the pathway
Advise Peter if the covenants will burden his land.

Covenant i) seems to fulfil the first elements of Tulk v Moxhay and if property registered under s32 Land Registration Act 2002 it will burden his land. Covenant ii) is positive and cannot burden his land but may be indirectly enforceable under Halsall v Brizzell principles. correct incorrect

Both covenants will burden the land as they touch & concern the land as in P & A Swift Investments v Combined English Stores. correct incorrect

Covenant i) seems to fulfil the first elements of Tulk v Moxhay and if property registered under s32 Land Registration Act 2002 it will burden his land. Covenant ii) is positive and cannot burden his land. correct incorrect

Neither of the covenants will burden his land as he was not party to the original agreements. correct incorrect