Smith & Snipes Hall Farm v River Douglas Catchment Board [1949] 2 KB 500

Court: House of Lords

Basic Facts: In 1938, D agreed to improve a river to prevent flooding on X’s land. X later sold the land to C, who sued D for breach of covenant when the land flooded.

Issue for the Court: Does the benefit of a positive covenant run with the land?

Held: The court held that positive covenants could run with the land where there is clear benefit to the dominant land.

Tucker LJ:

• The benefit of a positive covenant can run with the land if it is intended to benefit the land and is associated with ongoing obligations.

• Section 78 of the Law of Property Act 1925 allows successors to benefit from covenants even if they were not original parties to the agreement.

Denning LJ:

• The principle of privity of contract can be challenged; a person can enforce a covenant if it was intended to benefit them and they have an interest in the land.

• Section 56 of the LPA 1925 supports this principle, enabling beneficiaries to enforce agreements made for their benefit.