| dbo:abstract
|
- Tulk v Moxhay is a landmark English land law case that 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 Leicester Square exists today. On the face of it disavowing that covenants can "run with the land" so as to avoid the strict common law former definition of "running with the land", the case has been explained by the Supreme Court of Canada, in 1950 as "Covenants enforceable under the rule of Tulk v Moxhay, are properly conceived as running with the land in equity" which summarises how the case has been interpreted and applied in decisions across common law jurisdictions. (en)
|
| dbo:thumbnail
| |
| dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
| |
| dbo:wikiPageID
| |
| dbo:wikiPageLength
|
- 8834 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
|
| dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
| |
| dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
| |
| dbp:citations
|
- 41 (xsd:integer)
- [1848] EWHC Ch J34 (en)
|
| dbp:court
| |
| dbp:dateDecided
| |
| dbp:judges
| |
| dbp:keywords
|
- Restrictive covenant (en)
|
| dbp:name
| |
| dbp:priorActions
|
- Prohibitory injunction granted by the Master of the Rolls (en)
|
| dbp:transcripts
|
- None published. Court authorised Law Report issued. (en)
|
| dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
| dcterms:subject
| |
| gold:hypernym
| |
| rdf:type
| |
| rdfs:comment
|
- Tulk v Moxhay is a landmark English land law case that 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 Leicester Square exists today. (en)
|
| rdfs:label
| |
| owl:sameAs
| |
| prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
| foaf:depiction
| |
| foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
| is dbo:wikiPageRedirects
of | |
| is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
of | |
| is foaf:primaryTopic
of | |
