This article carries an instance wherein certain immovable property was sold with certain stipulation/s.

When his parents decided to move in, in 1935, they stipulated in the sale that the room should not be changed for 500 years.

Does a stipulation in the deed of sale subvert/undermine the purchaser's title by placing restrictions on how the property may best be enjoyed?

  • Would an affirmative answer to your question have any legal implications (for example, for the validity of the title or of the stipulation)?
    – phoog
    Sep 30, 2016 at 18:52
  • @phoog: I asked entirely out of curiosity
    – Everyone
    Oct 1, 2016 at 2:52
  • I guess what I'm getting at is that I have no idea what it means to subvert or undermine a title, so I can't form an opinion about whether the stipulation does that.
    – phoog
    Oct 1, 2016 at 5:34
  • @phoog: As a layman it appears to me that a stipulation/condition serves to establish an ongoing relationship between a vendor and purchaser. The ownership therefore may not be absolute - and could render the title void. p.s. IANAL
    – Everyone
    Oct 2, 2016 at 16:50

1 Answer 1


I'm unfamiliar with French law but in a common law system you are free to contract for whatever you like providing that it is not illegal.

However, the difficulty with such a term is enforcement. Imagine if, after the parents had died, the term was breached: who would know or care? Or if the property changed hands and this clause were not in that contract?

The way to do this in Australia is to put a covenant on the title - that way, the planning authority (local council) is responsible for enforcement. Covenants are very common,usually they create easements for services or rights of way: my property has a covenant that I cannot ask my neighbors to pay for half the cost of a privacy fence (which is otherwise a legal entitlement).

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .