Does a covenant restricting use of a piece of land may be enforced against a subsequent purchaser of the land? (Mulk v. Toxhay)
Yes. One who purchases property with knowledge of restrictive covenants (on notice) burdening the land must honor the covenant.
Yes, a covenant restricting the use of a piece of land may be enforced against a subsequent purchaser of the land if certain conditions are met.
In the case of Mulk v. Toxhay, the court held that the restrictive covenant prohibiting the use of a property for anything other than a single dwelling house was enforceable against a subsequent purchaser of the land. The court found that the covenant was clearly expressed and there was evidence that the original parties intended it to run with the land.
However, in order for a restrictive covenant to be enforced against a subsequent purchaser of the land, the covenant must meet certain legal requirements. The covenant must be valid, meaning that it does not violate any laws or public policy. Additionally, the covenant must be properly recorded in the land registry and the original parties to the covenant must have intended for it to run with the land.
Ultimately, whether a covenant restricting the use of a piece of land can be enforced against a subsequent purchaser of the land will depend on the specific circumstances of the case and the applicable legal requirements.
More Answers:
Understanding Payroll Taxes: Legal Obligations for Employers ExplainedHow enforcing racially restrictive covenants violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment: A review of Shelley v. Kramer.
Ensuring Safety and Health in ESA Process: Understanding Applicable Regulations and Best Practices