Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.


Re Nisbet and Potts’ Contract

[1906] 1 Ch 386

Case summary last updated at 08/01/2020 18:35 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case Re Nisbet and Potts’ Contract

A squatter who took title through adverse possession was held to be still subject to a covenant binding the dispossessed owner, and would bind all owners subsequent to the squatter who are not BF purchasers without notice (If they were BF purchasers without notice they would not be bound). They are taken to have constructive notice. 
Collins MR: If there was a restrictive covenant “analogous to a negative easement, then the squatter would take the land subject to the paramount right created by the obligation imposed by the covenant which adhered to the land, and the burden of that covenant would pass to those persons who might become assignees of the land or might acquire in any way a title to the land.” A BF purchaser without notice is availed of the covenant, but the burden is on the one claiming this to be the case, and this has not been achieved here. 

Have you seen Oxbridge Notes' best Land Law study materials?

Our law notes have been a popular underground sensation for 10 years:

  • Written by Oxford & Cambridge prize-winning graduates
  • Includes copious academic commentary in summary form
  • Concise structure relating cases and statutes into an easy-to-remember whole
  • Covers all major cases for LLB exams
  • Satisfaction guaranteed refund policy
  • Recently updated
Land Law Notes

Land Law Notes >>