In a deed, a grantee may agree to do something or refrain from doing certain acts. This agreement will become a binding contract between the grantor and the grantee. An example would be an agreement to maintain fences on the property or that the property will only be used for residential purposes. This kind of covenant is binding, not only between the grantor and the grantee, but also runs with the land. This means that anyone acquiring the land from the grantee is also bound by the covenant of the grantee. A covenant that provides that the grantee will refrain from certain conduct is called a restrictive or protective covenant. For example, there may be a covenant that no mobile home shall be placed on the property.
A restrictive or protective covenant may limit the kind of structure that can be placed on the property and may also restrict the use that can be made of the land. For example, when a tract of land is developed for individual lots and homes to be built, it is common to use the same restrictive covenants in all of the deeds in order to cause uniform restrictions and patterns on the property. For example, the developer may provide that no home may be built under a certain number of square feet. Any person acquiring a lot within the tract will be bound by the restrictions if they are placed in the deed or a prior recorded deed. Also, these restrictive covenants may be placed in a document at the outset of the development entitled "Restrictive Covenants," and list all the restrictive covenants that will apply to the tracts of land being developed. Any subsequent deed can then refer back to the book and page number where these restrictive covenants are recorded. Any person owning one of the lots in the tract may bring suit against another lot owner to enforce the restrictive covenants. However, restrictive covenants may be abandoned or not enforceable by estoppel if the restrictive covenants are violated openly for a sufficient period of time in order for a Court to declare that the restriction has been abandoned.
Restrictive Covenants In Shareholders Agreements In Florida
Instant download
Description
Free preview
Form popularity
FAQ
The 2024 Florida Statutes —As used in this chapter: (1) “Caregiver” means a parent, adult household member, or other person responsible for a child's welfare. (2) “Child” means any person under the age of 18 years.
Duration & Scope If the restriction is overly broad or unreasonable, it may be deemed unenforceable. A non-compete agreement also cannot prohibit an employee from engaging in any type of employment that is not related to the employer's company interests.
Florida statutes require that "the person seeking enforcement of a restrictive covenant shall plead and prove the existence of one or more legitimate business interests justifying the restrictive covenant." Fla. Stat. § 542.335(1)(b).
542.23 Equitable remedies. —In addition to other remedies provided by this chapter, any person shall be entitled to sue for and have injunctive or other equitable relief in the circuit courts of this state against threatened loss or damage by a violation of this chapter.
The inclusion of non-compete restrictions in a shareholders' agreement or an investment agreement can be a useful technique for companies to employ to ensure that a shareholder or investor cannot, either during their time holding shares in the company, or, for a specified period of time after, be involved in any ...
(b) “Covenant or restriction” means any agreement or limitation imposed by a private party and not required by a governmental agency as a condition of a development permit, as defined in s.
What specifically constitutes a “legitimate business interest” changes depending on the industry in which enforcement of the noncompete agreement is sought. Legitimate business interests are defined generally by Florida law to include, but not be limited to: Trade secrets, as defined in s. 688.002(4).
(1) Notwithstanding s. 542.18 and subsection (2), enforcement of contracts that restrict or prohibit competition during or after the term of restrictive covenants, so long as such contracts are reasonable in time, area, and line of business, is not prohibited.
The primary remedy for breach of a Restrictive Covenant is a permanent injunction to restrain the breach. However, the courts have jurisdiction to award damages instead of an injunction.
If it looks like a restrictive covenant is enforceable and is going to be breached by development, seek to obtain a restrictive covenant title indemnity insurance policy to cover any loss from a claim from a beneficiary. You should insure the full gross development value of the property affected.
