The Supreme Court has recently clarified the meaning of 'public interest' in a case where a housing company built on land adjoining a children's hospice, in breach of restrictive covenants.
Lord Burrows, giving the lead judgment, agreed that a narrow interpretation should be given to the meaning of 'contrary to the public interest', one of the justifications for modifying a restrictive covenant.
Paul Greatholder, acting for Alexander Devine, comments in New Law Journal on the Supreme Court's judgment.
Land Rights & the Public Interest is free to read on the New Law Journal website.
Paul is a partner in the property and housing litigation team.
He advises businesses, charities and individuals on all aspects of property disputes and their avoidance. Paul’s work covers enforcement of lease terms, recovery of money, real estate property disputes, and he has a specialism in business tenancy law.