Crest Nicholson Residential (South) Ltd v McAllister [2004] 1 WLR 2409

Facts

  • The case involved a restrictive covenant imposed in a 1925 conveyance prohibiting the construction of buildings on a specific plot of land without the consent of the vendor or their successors.
  • Crest Nicholson, the claimant, sought to develop the land, while McAllister, the defendant, asserted that the covenant remained enforceable.
  • The central dispute was whether the benefit of the covenant had been effectively annexed to the land.
  • The conveyance stated that the covenant was made "for the benefit of the vendor’s adjoining land," but did not explicitly identify the specific land to which the benefit was annexed.

Issues

  1. Whether the wording in the 1925 conveyance was sufficient to effect the annexation of the benefit of the restrictive covenant to the land.
  2. Whether vague or ambiguous language could support the enforceability of the restrictive covenant by successors in title.

Decision

  • The Court of Appeal held that the language in the conveyance was not sufficiently precise to effect annexation of the benefit of the covenant.
  • The reference to "the vendor’s adjoining land" without explicit identification was inadequate to attach the benefit to specific land.
  • The court confirmed that annexation requires explicit and unequivocal language demonstrating intent to benefit definite land.
  • As a result, the covenant was deemed unenforceable due to insufficient clarity in the drafting.

Legal Principles

  • The benefit of a restrictive covenant can only run with the land when there is clear evidence of annexation.
  • Annexation requires the covenant’s benefit to be explicitly and precisely attached to specific land, typically through clear wording in the original conveyance.
  • Vague, general, or ambiguous language is insufficient to effect annexation and may render a covenant unenforceable against successors in title.
  • The judgment reaffirmed the need for technical accuracy and explicit intent in drafting covenants to avoid disputes and uncertainty.

Conclusion

The Court of Appeal reaffirmed that strict and precise drafting is essential for the effective annexation of the benefit of restrictive covenants, holding that the absence of explicit identification of benefitted land in the conveyance rendered the covenant unenforceable by successors.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal