I've only experience of one covenant, the view was that all the signatories to the original covenant were deceased and their successors were amenable to a release from the covenant, in which case it was overturned...what would have happened if the successors wished to maintain the covenant I'm not sure.
And there - possibly - may lie the point. BMBC, through their part ownership of the holdings company effectively own half of the land and assets. While the beneficiaries of the original covenant may no longer be around to enforce it, the Council would presumably have the option of insisting on a recognition and/or reaffirmation of the covenant as a condition of any sale. That would have the benefit of preserving the use of Oakwell for the good of the community while recouping the relatively small amount of council taxpayers' funds used to acquire the interest, which is a canny bit of business!
Bristol rovers old ground next to the gas works had a covenant on it but when IKEA came knocking that was quickly brushed aside by the Dunford family who allegedly made a few bob on the deal. This also cast the football club and its fans into a long period of homelessness, which even now has never been fully resolved.
It will be speculation until the court case. However my feeling is it may be more likely to be the mineral rights. the title concerning them was registered in December 2017. Digging beyond a few feet trespasses on their rights even if they never intend to extract any minerals so would stop any construction.
The people who bought the mineral rights were opportunists that know they'll come into money when the club decide to build something. It's genius.
It's a small company that goes round securing mineral rights and covenants. I assume they use the rights to try and extract money from extremely naive land owners.
It was on here a couple of months back mate. The strip of land runs between the West Stand and North Stand level with the penalty spot. It might explain the gap being so big between the two stands.
I paid the land registry and got the maps, I posted em on here a while back. In December 2017 the same time as the club was being sold some company from Midlands registered mineral rights to the whole of the plot. I have no idea how they acquired them on that date. Whilst it's unlikely that anybody will start drilling for oil, it does mean anybody digging more than a couple of feet could be trespassing the mineral rights. To my mind it seemed to fit with what little word was escaping re the dispute. ie. Something hitherto undisclosed third party had emerged. Still just speculation till the court case casts more light.
Just googled my question below and whilst a quick search didn’t bring it up this and a couple of articles makes me wonder if the Crynes sold it to protect the land. In summary, and fuel or gold,silver etc rights can only be achieved by a lease (usually 6 years) and this from the Crown. This article raises though that owning the mineral rights could stop people deep piling etc as it could infringe on your mineral rights. https://www.crombiewilkinson.co.uk/site/blog/news/mines-and-minerals-do-you-know-your-rights
