Join Australia's most dynamic and respected property investment community

Restrictive covenant

Discussion in 'Legal Issues' started by PacMan, 29th Sep, 2016.

Tags:
  1. PacMan

    PacMan Active Member

    Joined:
    17th Nov, 2015
    Posts:
    35
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Hi all

    If there is a conveyancer who can assist us interpret the attached image of the covenant.

    Basically need to know if we can subdivide in the future or does this clause restrict us.

    Thanks
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Scott No Mates

    Scott No Mates Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    5,573
    Location:
    Sydney or NSW or Australia
    Overland Construction still exists, Colonial Constructions (also may exist) so may still have an interest in the original estate. The image is very blurred at higher magnification (which I can't read).

    Council LEP and DCPs can override the covenant in some instances.
     
    DaveM and PacMan like this.
  3. LifesGood

    LifesGood Home Building & Development Consultant Business Member

    Joined:
    26th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    646
    Location:
    Perth WA
    Restrictive covenants sometimes have an expiry date. Have you looked into that?
     
    PacMan likes this.
  4. KateAshmor

    KateAshmor Victorian conveyancing lawyer Business Member

    Joined:
    25th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    74
    Location:
    Melbourne
    It says "a dwelling house", which could be interpreted to mean only one dwelling is permitted. Best to talk to a planning lawyer / town planner experienced with developments that involve these types of restrictive covenants (I'm not).
     
    Dazedmw and Terry_w like this.
  5. Paul@PFI

    Paul@PFI Tax Accounting + SMSF Business Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    2,392
    Location:
    Sydney
    I had a client who lived on water in a good Sydney suburb. He had a real old covenant that limited his ability to build any structure. Required consent of a neighbour who last owned the site in 1940s. Was still alive and lived next door. He opposed a jacuzzi saying it was "like a pool". Title had a restrictive covenant over pools....$350K in legals later the courts permitted the build as a jacuzzi is NOT a pool.

    Paul Lederer and Anor v John Bowie-Wilson and Anor [2001] NSWSC 202 (27 March 2001)
     
    KateAshmor, Colin Rice and thatbum like this.