From Law wiki, the wiki for law research

[1970] 2 All ER 664; [1970] Ch 654

Two sisters owned a piece of land that they divided up into plots and built houses on. The plots were offered for sale to separate purchaser, who entered into covenants (see Freehold covenant) restricting the use of their land to the benefit of the development as a whole. Before all the plots were sold, the sister transferred their remaining land to their nephew, who continued to sell the plots to purchasers. The question eventually arose whether the later purchasers and the earlier purchasers could be bound by each other to their covenants. This development did not satisfy the traditional, long-standing criteria for the enforcement of abuilding scheme covenant in EllistonVReacher1908, which required that all purchasers derive title from a common vendor. Nevertheless, the court was prepared to find that a building scheme did exist, as it was clearly the intention of the vendors and the purchasers that the covenants be enforceable between occupiers. This suggests that the courts will be prepared to treat the Elliston criteria as guidelines, rather than applying them dogmatically.