In a residential neighbourhood, a homeowner, who had previously agreed to a positive covenant to maintain a communal garden, decides to sell their property. The original homeowner enters into an indemnity with the buyer.

What does this mean when the new owner neglects the garden maintenance, leading to legal action from the affected neighbours?

A. The affected neighbours can sue both the original homeowner and the new owner, as the indemnity effectively transfers the burden of the positive covenant to the successor in title.

B. The original homeowner, if sued by the neighbours for breach of the positive covenant, can in turn sue the new owner based on the indemnity to recover any losses or damages.

C. The indemnity covenant is considered null and void since the burden of a positive covenant cannot be transferred or shared with successors in title under any circumstances.

D. The new owner is automatically liable for any breach of the positive covenant, and the indemnity only serves as a formal agreement for garden maintenance, without legal implications.

E. The local council steps in to enforce the garden maintenance, rendering the indemnity and the positive covenant irrelevant in this scenario.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.