Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In some cases property owners can petition a court to remove or modify the covenants, and homeowner associations may include procedures for removing the covenants. The covenant may be negative or affirmative. A negative covenant is one in which property owners are unable to perform a specific activity, such as block a scenic view.
In real estate, a restrictive covenant is a rule or condition placed on a property that outlines what homeowners can and cannot do with their land. These covenants are legally binding and often ...
Land Law (restrictive covenants on land are imposed upon subsequent purchasers if the covenant benefits neighbouring land) Agency and the assignment of contractual rights are permitted. Third-party insurance - A third party may claim under an insurance policy made for their benefit, even though that party did not pay the premiums.
A full coverage search is usually done when creating a title report for sale/resale transactions and for transaction that involves construction loans. It generally includes searches related to property lien, easements, covenants, conditions and restrictions(CC&Rs), agreements, resolutions and ordinances that will affect the real property in question.
This builds on earlier legislation that allowed homeowners to request the removal of such language. [57] Washington: The state passed a law in 2021 that requires all real estate documents to be free from racially restrictive covenants and provides a process for property owners to have them removed. [58]
Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1 (1948), is a landmark [1] United States Supreme Court case that held that racially restrictive housing covenants cannot legally be enforced.. The case arose after an African-American family purchased a house in St. Louis that was subject to a restrictive covenant preventing "people of the Negro or Mongolian Race" from occupying the property.
Tulk v Moxhay is a landmark English land law case which decided that in certain cases a restrictive covenant can "run with the land" (i.e. a future owner will be subject to the restriction) in equity. It is the reason that Leicester Square exists today.
Wrotham Park Estate Co Ltd v Parkside Homes Ltd [1974] 1 WLR 798 (/ ˈ r uː t ə m /) is an English land law and English contract law case, concerning the measure and availability of damages for breach of negative covenant in circumstances where the court has confirmed that a covenant is legally enforceable and refused, as unconscionable, to issue an order for specific performance or an ...