Sibley v Grosvenor

In *Sibley v Grosvenor*, the High Court of Australia considered a dispute between the plaintiff, Sibley, and the defendant, Grosvenor. The case concerned the interpretation and enforceability of a restrictive covenant contained within a deed of conveyance.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the restrictive covenant, which purported to prevent the grantee from carrying on a business that competed with the grantor's existing business on adjoining land, was valid and enforceable. Specifically, the Court had to determine if the covenant offended the rule against perpetuities and if it constituted an unreasonable restraint of trade.

The Court reasoned that the covenant, by its nature, sought to restrict the use of land in perpetuity. Applying the rule against perpetuities, which requires that an interest in property must vest within a specified period, the Court found that the covenant's indefinite duration meant it was void from its inception. Furthermore, the Court considered the covenant's impact on trade, concluding that it imposed an unreasonable restraint on the defendant's ability to conduct business, thereby infringing upon public policy.

Consequently, the High Court held that the restrictive covenant was unenforceable.