From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- "Contract with God" redirects here. For the Will Eisner graphic
novel, see A Contract With
God.
A covenant, in its most general sense, is a
solemn promise to engage in or refrain from a specified action.
A covenant is a type of
contract in which the covenantor makes a
promise to a covenantee to do or not do some action. In
real property law,
the term
real covenants is used for conditions tied
to the use of land. A "covenant running with the land", also called
a
covenant appurtenant, imposes duties or restrictions
upon the use of that land regardless of the owner. In contrast, the
covenant in gross imposes duties or restrictions on a
particular owner.
[1]Covenants for title are covenants which come with a
deed or
title to the property, in which the
grantor of the title makes certain guarantees to the grantee.
[1]==In a religious context== ;-)
In certain religions, a covenant is a formal
alliance or agreement made by
God with that religious community or with humanity
in general. This sort of covenant is an important concept in
Judaism and
Christianity, derived
in the first instance from the
biblical covenant tradition. An
example of a covenant relationship in
Judaism and
Christianity is that between
Abraham and God, in which God
made a covenant with Abram that He would bless Abram's descendants
making them more numerous than the stars. Also Job made a covenant
with his eyes (Job 31:1).
[2]
Christianity asserts that God made an additional covenant through
Jesus Christ, called the "
new covenant", in which Jesus' sacrifice
on the cross would atone for the sins of all who put their faith in
him (Matthew 26:28). In
Islam
God reminds all humanity of their covenants with him.
[3]A covenant may also refer to an agreement between members of a
congregation to work together according to the precepts of their
religion. In
Islam, God enters
into a covenant with
Muhammad, impressing into his shoulder the
seal of prophecy. In
Indo-Iranian religious
tradition,
Mithra-
Mitra is the
hypostasis of covenant, and
hence keeper and protector of moral, social and interpersonal
relationships, including love and friendship. In living
Zoroastrianism,
which is one of the two primary developments of Indo-Iranian
religious tradition, Mithra is by extension a judge, protecting
agreements by ensuring that individuals who break one do not enter
Heaven.
In a legal
context
Under the
common
law a covenant was distinguished from an ordinary contract by
the presence of a
seal. Because the presence of a seal
indicated an unusual solemnity in the promises made in a covenant,
the common law would enforce a covenant even in the absence of
consideration. A
Covenant is also used to describe a contract or a legally binding
promise.
[4]Covenants in planned
communities
In contemporary practice in the United States, a covenant
typically refers to restrictions set on contracts like deeds of
sale. "Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions," commonly
abbreviated "CC&Rs" or "CCRs", are a complicated system of
covenants, known generically as "deed
restrictions," built into the
deeds of all the lots
[5] in a
common interest development, particularly in the tens of millions
of American homes governed by a
homeowner
association (HOA) or
condominium
association. There are some office or industrial parks subject
to CCRs as well.
These CCRs might, for example, dictate building materials
(including roofing materials), prohibit certain varieties of trees,
or place restrictions on the number of dwellings that may be built
on the property. The purpose of this is to maintain a neighborhood
character or prevent improper use of the land. Many covenants of
this nature were imposed in the 1920s through the 1940s, before
zoning became widespread.
However, many modern developments are also restricted by covenants
on property titles; this is often justified as a means of
preserving the values of the houses in the area. Covenant
restrictions can be removed through court action, although this
process is lengthy and often very expensive. In some cases it even
involves a
plebiscite of nearby property owners.
Although control of such
planning issues is
often governed by local planning schemes or other regulatory
frameworks rather than through the use of covenants, there are
still many covenants imposed, particularly in states that limit the
level of control over real property use that may be exercised by
local governments.
Exclusionary covenants
In the 1920s and 1930s, covenants that restricted the sale or
occupation of
real
property on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion or social
class were common in the United States, where the primary intent
was to keep "
white" neighbourhoods "white". Such
covenants (also known as racial covenants or racial
restrictive covenants) were employed by
many
real estate developers to
“protect” entire
subdivisions. The purpose of an
exclusionary covenant was to prohibit a buyer of property from
reselling, leasing or transferring the property to members of a
given race, ethnic origin and/ or religion as specified in the
title
deed. Some covenants, such as those tied to properties in
Forest Hills Gardens,
New York, also sought to exclude
working class
people however this type of
social
segregation was more commonly achieved through the use of high
property prices, minimum cost requirements and application
reference checks.
[6] In
practice, exclusionary covenants were most typically concerned with
keeping out African-Americans, however restrictions against
Asian-Americans,
Jews and
Catholics were not
uncommon. For example, the Lake Shore Club District in
Pennsylvania, sought
to exclude anyone of
Negro,
Mongolian,
Hungarian,
Mexican,
Greek,
Armenian,
Austrian,
Italian,
Russian,
Polish,
Slavish or
Roumanian birth.
[7] Cities
known for their widespread use of racial covenants include
Chicago,
Baltimore,
Detroit and
Los Angeles.
History
Racial covenants emerged during the mid-nineteenth century and
started to gain prominence from the 1890s onwards. However it was
not until the 1920s that they adopted widespread national
significance, a situation that continued until the 1940s. Some
commentators have attributed the popularity of exclusionary
covenants at this time as a response to the
urbanisation of black
Americans following
World War 1, the consequent
race
riots of 1917-1921 and the 1917
US Supreme Court
ruling of
Buchanan v. Warley that invalidated
the imposition of racially restrictive
zoning ordinances (residential segregation based
on race) on constitutional grounds.
[8][9] An
alternative interpretation is that the rapid expansion in use of
these covenants was triggered by the fear of "black invasion" into
white neighbourhoods which would result in depressed property
prices, increased nuisance (crime) and social instability.
[10]Opposition
During the 1920s, the
National Association for the Advancement of
Coloured People (NAACP) sponsored several unsuccessful legal
challenges against racial covenants. In a blow to campaigners
against
racial segregation, the legality of
racial restrictive covenants was affirmed by the landmark Corrigan
v. Buckley
271 U.S. 323 (1926)
judgement that ruled that such clauses constituted "private action"
and as such were not subject to the
Due Process clause of
the
Fourteenth
Amendment.
[11] As a
result of this decision, racial restrictive covenants proliferated
across the United States during the 1920s and 1930s. Even the
invalidation of such a covenant by the U.S. Supreme Court in the
1940 case of
Hansberry v. Lee did little to reverse
the trend because the ruling was based on a
technicality and
failed to set a
legal precedent.
[12] It
was not until 1948 that the
Shelley v. Kraemer judgement
overturned the Corrigan v. Buckley decision in stating that
exclusionary covenants were unconstitutional under the Fourteenth
Amendment and were therefore legally unenforceable.
[13]Exclusionary covenants
today
Although exclusionary covenants are not enforceable today, they
still exist in many original property deeds as 'underlying
documents', and
Title insurance policies often contain
exclusions preventing coverage of such restrictions.
Examples in
U.S.
- Forest Hills Gardens, Queens, New York –
covenants forbade the sale of real property to blacks, Jews and
working-class people.
- Jackson
Heights, Queens, New York – covenants employed to restrict
occupancy to white, non-immigrant Protestants.[14]
- Washington Park
Subdivision, Chicago, Illinois – restrictive covenants used to
exclude African-Americans.
- Palos Verdes,
Los Angeles, California – covenants forbade an owner to sell or
rent a house to anyone not of white or Caucasian race and to not
permit African-Americans on their property with the exception of
chauffeurs, gardeners and domestic servants.[15]
- Guilford, Baltimore, Maryland –
covenants provided for exclusion against negros or persons of negro
extraction.[16]
Examples
outside U.S.
Although most commonly associated with the United States, racial
restrictive covenants have been used in other countries:
- Canada – Subdivisions such
as Westdale,
Ontario employed racial covenants to bar a diverse array of
ethnic groups such as Armenians and foreign-born Italians and
Jews.[17]
Opposition to exclusionary covenants was significant in Canada,
culminating in the 1945 Re: Drummond Wren ruling by the Ontario
High Court which invalidated their use. This judgement was
influential in guiding similar decisions in the United States and
elsewhere.[18]
- South Africa –
racial covenants emerged in Natal during the 1890s as an attempt to
prevent Indians from acquiring properties in more expensive areas
and were commonplace across the country by the 1930s. They were
later used as a tool to further the cause of apartheid against the
black population.[19]
- Zimbabwe – Asians and
coloured people were excluded from purchasing or occupying homes in
European areas by restrictive racial covenants written into most
title deeds.[20]
Title
covenants
Title covenants serve as guarantees to the recipient of
property, ensuring that the recipient receives what he or she
bargained for. The
English covenants of title,
sometimes included in deeds to real property, are (1) that the
grantor is lawfully seized (in fee simple) of the property, (2)
that the grantor has the right to convey the property to the
grantee, (3) that the property is conveyed without encumbrances
(this covenant is frequently modified to allow for certain
encumbrances), (4) that the grantor has done no act to encumber the
property, (5) that the grantee shall have quiet possession of the
property, and (6) that the grantor will execute such further
assurances of the land as may be requisite (Nos. 3 and 4, which
overlap significantly, are sometimes treated as one item).
[21] The
English covenants may be described individually, or they may be
incorporated by reference, as in a deed granting property "with
general warranty and English covenants of title..."
[22]In a
historical context
In a historical context, a covenant applies to formal promises
that were made
under
oath, or in less remote history, agreements in which the name
actually uses the term 'covenant', implying that they were binding
for all time.
One of the earliest attested covenants between parties is the
so-called Mitanni treaty, dating to the 14th or 15th century BC,
between the
Hittites and
the
Mitanni.
The term covenant could be used in English to refer to either
the
Bundesbrief of 1291, or the
Pfaffenbrief of 1370,
documents which led to the formation of the Swiss state or "
Eidgenossenschaft". In this usage the
German
"Eid" is being translated as
covenant
rather than
oath in order to reflect its written
status.
See also
References
- ^ a
b
Covenant. (2008). West's Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2.
Retrieved August 7 2009 from http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Covenant.
- ^
Genesis
15:5, 15:18.
- ^
Qur'an 36:60, 61.
- ^
taken from http://www.confusedaboutlaw.co.uk/wordlist_c.html
- ^
McKenzie, Evan. Privatopia:
Homeowner Associations and the Rise of Residential Private
Governments. Yale University Press. pp. 20. ISBN
0-300-06638-4.
- ^
Fogelson, Robert M. (2005). Bourgeois Nightmares: Suburbia
1870-1930. New Haven: Yale University Press. pp131-137.
- ^
Fogelson, Robert M. (2005). Bourgeois Nightmares: Suburbia
1870-1930. New Haven: Yale University Press. p103.
- ^
Correa-Jones, M. (2000). The Origins and Diffusion of Racial
Restrictive Covenants. Political Science Quarterly, Vol.
115, No. 4, p543.
- ^
Meyer, Stephen G. (2000). As long as they don't move next door:
segregation and racial conflict in American neighborhoods.
Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. p26.
- ^
Fogelson, Robert M. (2005). Bourgeois Nightmares: Suburbia
1870-1930. New Haven: Yale University Press. pp97-98.
- ^
Meyer, Stephen G. (2000). As long as they don't move next door:
segregation and racial conflict in American neighborhoods.
Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. p31.
- ^
Meyer, Stephen G. (2000). As long as they don't move next door:
segregation and racial conflict in American neighborhoods.
Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. p57.
- ^
Meyer, Stephen G. (2000). As long as they don't move next door:
segregation and racial conflict in American neighborhoods.
Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. p94.
- ^
Miyares, Ines M. (2004). From exclusionary covenant to ethnic
diversity in Jackson Heights, Queens. The Geographical
Review. Vol. 94, No. 4, p463.
- ^
Fogelson, Robert M. (2005). Bourgeois Nightmares: Suburbia
1870-1930. New Haven: Yale University Press. p15.
- ^
Fogelson, Robert M. (2005). Bourgeois Nightmares: Suburbia
1870-1930. New Haven: Yale University Press. p65.
- ^
Fogelson, Robert M. (2005). Bourgeois Nightmares: Suburbia
1870-1930. New Haven: Yale University Press. p103.
- ^
Walker, James W. St. G. (1997). Race, rights and the law in the
Supreme Court of Canada: historical case studies. Waterloo:
Wilfred Laurier University Press. pp204-205.
- ^
Christopher, A. J. (2001). The Atlas of Changing South
Africa. 2nd Edition. London: Routledge. p181.
- ^
Baker, Donald G. (1983). Race, ethnicity, and power.
London: Routledge. p109.
- ^
E.g., Richmond v. Hall, 251 Va. 151, 160, 466
S.E.2d 103, 107 (1996).
- ^
E.g., Virginia Code § 55-70.
The Halo Series
Wikis
Quiz
Map
Misc
Search
