Rees v Peters [2011] All ER (D) 193

There was a restrictive covenant against the title holder (title holder not allowed to do certain things). This restrictive covenant was not registered and if the error was corrected there would be a loss of value of the land. The question was whether or not it would be unjust to not correct the mistake.

The court held that merely paying or compensating for the omission was not sufficient. What was required was the restrictive covenant itself. Paying off the mistake was not just. The register was thus rectified.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *