Consider house deeds which contain a clause of the form

the owner acknowledges that [matter related to nearby but non-adjoining land] has [legal status]

and that the owner believes the statement to be true on first glance, and that this is acceptable to them, and they consider themselves duly informed of the other party's determination of this fact.

What further legal force does this have over the owner? If the owner comes to a different opinion over the matter of the current status of the other land, it's surely not that they must vacate the property, or pay compensation, as a result of their opinion?

Are there any restrictions over whether the owner may, for example, petition for the status of the land (which they do not own) to change?

Can real estate covenants really extend to matters of the owner's determination of an objective fact?

  • in case it makes a difference the kind of status I'm thinking of is: is a superfund site, is a public right of way, is zoned for commerical use, has a licence to store tyres, is owned by British Airways, includes a right to roam, etc. – Dan Sheppard Jun 10 '16 at 13:22

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.