These legal incidents alone would appear to activate the restrictive covenant at the Higgs Centre which reads: "It shall be deemed reasonable for the charity to withhold its consent to a proposed disposal (irrespective of whether the landlord's consent shall have been obtained) if the proposed disponee
is a person, firm, company or other entity which has, in the period of five years immediately preceding the date of this deed, either actually served proceedings upon and/ or threatened to serve proceedings upon the charity or if the proposed disponee
is a person, firm, company or other entity which is either a member of the same group of companies and/or is under the same ultimate control as and/ or otherwise associated with the litigant."
In unconscionable dealing cases, however, the majority opined that the emphasis is on the quality of the disponee
's conduct, so it was appropriate in this context to focus exclusively on the denial, by D, of the opportunity for P to have the assistance of disinterested advice, rather than to speculate as to what might have followed had such advice been pursued.
* the prescriptive easement was 'within the actual knowledge' of the disponee; (242)
(247) Yet two of the statutory standards which ensure that a prescriptive easement constitutes an 'overriding interest' concentrate on whether the disponee had notice or would have had notice on reasonable inspection.
If the recipient did dispose of the property and is now impecunious, the forced heirs may challenge the disponee
, whether he took by gift or by purchase for value, with or without notice, unless the heirs consented to the disposition inter vivos.
Reentailing his inheritance, Baron Bradwardine literally resigns his fee to the Hanoverian succession "in favorem," that is, "for the express purpose of its re-grant to the disponee
as a new vassal."(23) The reentailment thus implies not only the expiration of the original Bradwardine tailzie from the fourteenth century and the eventual surrender of the Bradwardine lands to an English family, but also the recognition of Stuart right as defeasible.
Attorneys are not disponors of property (for example, a seller), or disponees
(for example a buyer) and therefore both the donor of a power (the person who has appointed the attorney) and their attorney are separate persons, for the purpose of our identity requirements.