Andrew Lugger considers the case against land obligation & advises us to learn the lessons of the past
The Law Commission, at an early stage, decided that restrictive covenants should go high on the list of subjects for consideration with a view to reform. It remains convinced that the technicalities of the existing law of restrictive covenants have made the conveyancing process complicated, and the position of the parties left uncertain by restrictive covenants appearing on the title of the burdened property of which enforceability is less than certain.
The concept of “land obligation” was first introduced in the Law Commission’s Report on Restrictive Covenants in 1967. Smitten with this concept as a cure for the complexities of restrictive covenant enforcement, the Law Commission has tried unsuccessfully in all its subsequent reports to replace covenants with land obligation.
This new interest in land will adhere to specified piece and parcel of land for the benefit of other specified land thus allowing the burden and benefit to run automatically. Land obligations would be enforceable only by and against the persons currently concerned with the land,
