In 2004, Ned bought two hectares in Richmond. In 2014, he subdivided the property, keeping Lot A for himself and selling Lot B to Weerdt. Ned also retained a right of way along one side of Lot B to permit access to the road. Another term of the contract required Weerdt to plant a row of poplar trees along the boundary with Lot A within two months of the sale. Both covenants were registered. Weerdt took possession and soon built a small motorcross course near Ned's lot where he and his friends practised on their unmuffled dirt bikes, during which times Ned was unable to use his backyard because of the noise. Weerdt hauled the cycles around in his truck, which he often parked either on Ned's property or in the right of way, blocking Ned's passage. Weerdt never did plant the trees. Based on these facts, which one of the following is false?
◦ Ned could ask for an injunction as a remedy.
◦ Ned could sue Weerdt for breach of contract.
◦ Ned could secretly place strips of spikes on his property to deflate the tires of those who trespassed on his property.
◦ Ned could sue Weerdt for the tort of nuisance.
◦ Ned could sue Weerdt for interference with his right of way.
Self-sealing property
Biology Forums Topic Display (2012 - Late 2014)
Women who are monozygotic twins and have the same genes are more similar in their marital happiness
Decremental property of graded potentials.
Prestige can sometimes be converted into property. Shown here is “Snooki” Polizzi, a reality ...
Sonal bought a coat for $198.88, which included 8% PST and 5% GST. What was the selling price ...