Rhone and Another v Stephens (executrix)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 15 January 1993 |
| Date | 15 January 1993 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
Court of Appeal
Before Lord Justice Nourse and Lord Justice Steyn
Conveyancing - positive covenant- unclear wording - no qualifying effect
The unclear wording of a positive covenant by a vendor in a deed conveying a part of his property could not be relied on to qualify the effect of a clear and unambiguous parcels clause identifying the part of the property that was being conveyed.
Moreover, because of the continued existence of the much criticised rule in Austerberry v Oldham CorporationELR ((1885) 29 ChD 750) that the burden of a positive covenant could not run with freehold land, the vendor's covenant to maintain the roof over the part of the property conveyed was not enforcable against his successors in title.
The Court of Appeal so held in allowing an appeal by the defendant, Mrs Jean Stephens, the executrix of the deceased owner of Walford House, Combwich, Somerset, from the judgment of Judge Cotterell in Bridgewater County Court in July 1991 whereby he granted the plaintiffs, Ronald and Hazel Rhone, the owners of Walford Cottage, a declaration that the defendant was the owner of defective roofing overlying their cottage and was liable in nuisance for failure to keep it in repair. The judge had made various orders against the defendant including one that she pay damages of £4,913 to the plaintiffs.
Mr David Spens for the defendant; Mr J A Virgo for the plaintiffs.
LORD JUSTICE NOURSE said that in 1960 the freehold owner of Walford House had...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Davies and Others v Jones and another
...dealt with this issue in paragraphs 20 to 23 of his judgment. In his consideration of it he referred to the speech of Lord Templeman in Rhone v Stephens [1994] 2 A.C 310, and thereby indirectly to Halsall v Brizell [1956] 1 Ch 169 and Tito v Waddell (No.2) [1977] Ch 106. He also referred t......
-
Jenkins v Young Brothers Transport Ltd
...the issue, necessarily not as extensively argued before him as before us, of whether the CFA could be assigned and after considering Rhone –v—Stephens [1994 2 AC 310] in particular, held that the assignments were valid. It is submitted by Mr Orr that Master Campbell's decision was wrong in ......
-
89 Holland Park (Management) Ltd and Others v MS Sophie Louise Hicks
... ... Mr Rodger referred to the speech of Lord Templeman in Rhone v. Stephens [1994] 2 AC 310 at pp 317–318. Lord Templeman referred to ... I agree with Mr Small that this is another factor in favour of the implication of the proviso ... 93 ... ...
-
Bath Rugby Ltd v Caroline Greenwood
... ... 7 The estate subsequently passed to another branch of the family and into the hands of the Earl of Darlington, later 1 ... ) bound by a contract unless they were party to the contract: Rhone v Stephens [1994] 2 AC 310 at 316H per Lord Templeman. But under the ... ...