Current as of: 2009 (1) An affordable housing covenant is valid and enforceable even though the covenant is not of a character traditionally recognized at common law or is inconsistent with a common law doctrine of real property law that might invalidate, impair enforcement of or cause the termination of the covenant, including but not limited to common law doctrine that holds that: (a) The covenant is not appurtenant to an interest in the real property. (b) The covenant imposes a negative burden. (c) The covenant imposes affirmative obligations upon the owner of an interest in the burdened real property or the eligible covenant holder. (d) The covenant is held by an eligible covenant holder that does not have an interest in the real property that is benefited by enforcement of the covenant against the burdened property. (e) The benefit of the covenant does not touch or concern real property in any other way. (f) There is no privity of estate or privity of contract. (g) The covenant can be or has been conveyed or assigned to a covenant holder. (h) The covenant is an unreasonable restraint on alienability. (i) The covenant is a clog on the equity of redemption. (j) The covenant lacks adequate consideration. (2) An affordable housing covenant is valid and enforceable even if the covenant violates the rule against perpetuities set forth in ORS 105.950 to 105.975. (3) If a court denies equitable enforcement of an affordable housing covenant because of a change of circumstances that renders the covenant not in the public interest, the court may award damages as the only remedy in an action to enforce the affordable housing covenant. (4) The court may not use a comparative economic test as a basis for a determination that an affordable housing covenant is not in the public interest. [2007 c.691 ยง6] Prev | Next________________________________________________________________________
Questions & Answers: Housing
 |
Email
Print