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Your email address will not be published.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 *

Free Registration introduction text Free Registration introduction text Free Registration introduction text

Our membership includes

Click on icons for previews
Notes icon
Notes
Essays icon
Essays
Tutorial Videos icon
Tutorial Videos
Quizzes icon
Quizzes
Study/Exam Tips icon
Study/Exam Tips
Interactive Learning Platform icon
Interactive Learning Platform
Quiz preview
Interactive Learning PLatform preview