The Court is routinely invited to declare restrictive covenants unenforceable on the grounds that no land is identified as benefiting from a restriction, and it will generally do so without any form of public or private notice:

• in Re Pomroy S ECI 2021 03444 Matthews AsJ (as she then was) discharged a restrictive covenant on the grounds that “The restrictive covenant contained in Instrument of Transfer No. 1159026 in the Register kept by the Registrar of Titles under the Transfer of Land Act 1958 (Vic) is not enforceable by any persons other than the Transferors named in the said Instrument of Transfer”;
• in Re Antony & Sunita S ECI 2023 03873 Ierodiaconou AsJ concluded that the Covenant was invalidly registered, as it “failed to identify any land as taking its benefit”. It followed that: “The Covenant should be discharged because of there being no substantial injury to any person entitled to its benefit”; and
• in Re Burton S ECI 2024 02915, Daly AsJ discharged a restrictive covenant on the grounds that “The Court is satisfied that the covenant is invalidly registered, as it fails to identify any land as taking its benefit. The covenant should be discharged because of there being no substantial injury to any person entitled to its benefit.”

No form of notice was required in any of these applications.