Russell v Archdale

302 words (1 pages) Case Summary in Cases

12/10/18 Cases Reference this

Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our professional writers as a learning aid to help you with your studies.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of

If you would like to view samples of the work produced by our academic writers please click here.

Russell v Archdale [1964] Ch 38

Property law – Restrictive covenants – Annexation of rights


A vendor company conveyed property which included barns and stables as part of the ‘Hedgerley Park estate’ to the defendant. The company also owned a neighbouring estate. There was a clause included in the transfer which required the purchaser to protect the adjoining land (which was owned by the vendor). The vendor subsequently sold a further piece of the estate to the plaintiffs who brought an action which questioned the restrictive covenants regarding the property.


The court established that this case was one of the construction of the conveyancing and the covenants listed within. The court looked to establish the definition of the ‘adjoining and neighbouring land’ referred to in the covenant and whether the phrase could annex the benefit of the covenant to the whole of the vendor’s land. If this could be found then the covenant could be enforced by the plaintiff. There was also a challenge brought on the basis that planning authority had been given for the development of the land which may breach the covenant listed in the conveyance.


The court held that the phrase ‘adjoining and neighbouring land’ would suffice to annex the benefit of the covenants to all of the land owned by the vendor company, at the time of the conveyance. However, the phrase was not sufficient to annex it to every part of the estate and therefore the plaintiffs could not enforce the covenant having acquired only part of the land. Lastly, the court found that the development of such land in the manner prescribed in the planning permission would also breach the covenant.

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

DMCA / Removal Request

If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have the essay published on the UK Essays website then please.

Ready to get started?