- Considers the case of Shaviram Normandy Ltd v Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council, in which the Upper Tribunal allowed the modification of a purpose-built office building’s leasehold covenant to permit use as a residential building.
Property practitioners will be well aware of the jurisdiction to modify restrictive covenants affecting freehold land conferred upon the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) by s 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925. Freehold owners keen to develop their land will often rely upon one of the four grounds set out in s 84 to discharge or modify any valid and binding covenant which inhibits or prevents their desired development. Thus, obsolete covenants (ground (a)); or covenants which confer no practical benefit of substantial value (ground (aa)); or covenants where the beneficiaries agree (ground (b)); or covenants the discharge of which will cause no injury (ground (c)), may be swept away and constructive land development may be facilitated. But the jurisdiction is not limited
