To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library




Tulk v. Moxhay

Law Dictionary

Law Dictionary

Featuring Black's Law Dictionary 2nd Ed.
Font size

Property Law Keyed to Dukeminier

View this case and other resources at:
Bloomberg Law

Citation. 41 ER 1143, Volume 41

Brief Fact Summary. The Plaintiff, Tulk (Plaintiff), had sold Leicester Square by deed containing. The Defendant, Moxhay (Defendant), a subsequent purchaser sought to build upon the land. Plaintiff brought a bill for injunction.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. Since a covenant is a contract between the vendor and the vendee, it may be enforced against a subsequent purchaser who has notice of the contractual obligation of his vendor, even though it does not run with the land.

Facts. The Plaintiff sold Leicester Square with the restriction that it be maintained in a certain form as a public “pleasure ground”. The deed restriction was covenant for heirs and assigns requiring that the land be maintained as a square garden. The Plaintiff continued to own homes and live around the square after its sale. In 1808, the person who originally purchased Leicester Square from the plaintiff had notice of the covenant contained in the deed. Forty years later, the property was sold to the Defendant, Moxhay. Moxhal sought to build upon the land on the square. Plaintiff brought a bill for injunction to stop any construction.

Issue. Can a covenant restricting a property to a specific use be enforced against a subsequent purchaser?

Create New Group

Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following