Pink v Cummings

The dispute in Pink v Cummings involved the owners of two neighbouring properties, with the plaintiff seeking to enforce a restrictive covenant that limited modifications to the defendant’s property. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The plaintiff alleged that proposed modifications by the defendant would obstruct the views from the plaintiff’s property, which benefitted from the covenant. The defendant argued that the proposed changes would not significantly impair the views.

The central legal issue was whether the proposed modifications would constitute an impairment of the restrictive covenant. This required the court to determine whether the changes would have a substantial effect on the views from the plaintiff’s property. The court also needed to consider whether any impairment was justified under the circumstances.

The court held that the proposed modifications would indeed impair the views from the plaintiff’s property, thereby breaching the restrictive covenant. The changes, which included the installation of a veranda and an awning, would obstruct the plaintiff's line of sight and diminish the aesthetic value of the property. The court found that the impairment was significant and not justified. Consequently, the court ordered the defendant to refrain from proceeding with the modifications. The cross-claim by the defendant was dismissed as the court found no merit in the arguments presented.