These fears were allayed by the decision in [ case ], which held that the effect of LPA 1925, s 78(1) could be expressly excluded (even though s 78 (unlike s 79) is expressed in absolute terms and not subject to a contrary intention).
Answer
Roake v Chadha [1984] 1 WLR 40
Tags
#estates #freehold-covenant #land #law
Question
These fears were allayed by the decision in [ case ], which held that the effect of LPA 1925, s 78(1) could be expressly excluded (even though s 78 (unlike s 79) is expressed in absolute terms and not subject to a contrary intention).
Answer
?
Tags
#estates #freehold-covenant #land #law
Question
These fears were allayed by the decision in [ case ], which held that the effect of LPA 1925, s 78(1) could be expressly excluded (even though s 78 (unlike s 79) is expressed in absolute terms and not subject to a contrary intention).
Answer
Roake v Chadha [1984] 1 WLR 40
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it These fears were allayed by the decision in Roake v Chadha [1984] 1 WLR 40, which held that the effect of LPA 1925, s 78(1) could be expressly excluded (even though s 78 (unlike s 79) is expressed in absolute terms and not subject to a contrary
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.