Tulk v. Moxhay
Court of Chancery, England
41 Eng. Rep. 1143 (1848)
Tulk (plaintiff) owned Leicester Square, a plot of land that contained houses and a square garden. In 1808, he sold a portion to Elms, conveying the portion in fee but containing a covenant stipulating that the square garden must be maintained and that no houses be built on that ground. The covenant purported to bind Elms as well as his heirs, executors, and administrators. Elms’s land was eventually conveyed to Moxhay (defendant), whose deed did not contain the same covenant, although he took the land with knowledge of it. Moxhay desired to build upon the square garden. Tulk, who still owned several houses on the land, sought an injunction preventing Moxhay from disturbing the square garden. The lower court granted the injunction, and Moxhay appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Cottenham, Lord Chancellor)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 711,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 711,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,600 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.