It may be possible to sever the positive undertaking from the negative, thus allowing the negative undertaking to pass this first hurdle under Tulk v Moxhay (refer to [ case ]). To do this, the two parts of the obligation must be capable of standing alone as separate obligations.
Answer
Shepherd Homes Ltd v Sandham (No2) [1971] 2 All ER 1267
Tags
#estates #freehold-covenant #land #law
Question
It may be possible to sever the positive undertaking from the negative, thus allowing the negative undertaking to pass this first hurdle under Tulk v Moxhay (refer to [ case ]). To do this, the two parts of the obligation must be capable of standing alone as separate obligations.
Answer
?
Tags
#estates #freehold-covenant #land #law
Question
It may be possible to sever the positive undertaking from the negative, thus allowing the negative undertaking to pass this first hurdle under Tulk v Moxhay (refer to [ case ]). To do this, the two parts of the obligation must be capable of standing alone as separate obligations.
Answer
Shepherd Homes Ltd v Sandham (No2) [1971] 2 All ER 1267
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it It may be possible to sever the positive undertaking from the negative, thus allowing the negative undertaking to pass this first hurdle under Tulk v Moxhay (refer to Shepherd Homes Ltd v Sandham (No2) [1971] 2 All ER 1267). To do this, the two parts of the obligation must be capable of standing alone as separate obligations.
Original toplevel document (pdf)
cannot see any pdfs
Summary
status
not learned
measured difficulty
37% [default]
last interval [days]
repetition number in this series
0
memorised on
scheduled repetition
scheduled repetition interval
last repetition or drill
Details
No repetitions
Discussion
Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.