The doctrine of benefit and burden – an indirect method for enforcing the burden of positive freehold covenants – developed as an exception the strict Austerberry rule that the burden of positive covenants cannot bind successors directly at law. Three recent Court of Appeal cases (Davies v Jones; Wilkinson v Kerdene and Elwood v Goodman) confirm the continued existence and application of the doctrine but also reveal its deficiencies and limitations. This article explores the contemporary application of the doctrine, identifies its theoretical, historical and elemental frailty and, drawing on recent reform proposals of the Law Commission, highlights the case for reform. In so doing, this article argues that a vital theoretical issue has been overlooked in the reform debate: the numerus clausus principle.

中文翻译：

---

利益和负担的教义：改革圣约法和数数条款的“问题”

利益和负担学说——一种强制执行积极的永久业权契约负担的间接方法——作为一个例外发展为严格的奥斯特莓规定积极契约的负担不能直接约束法律上的继承人。最近的三起上诉法院案件（戴维斯诉琼斯；威尔金森 v 克登和埃尔伍德 v 古德曼) 确认该学说的持续存在和适用，但也揭示其不足和局限。本文探讨了该学说的当代应用，确定了其理论、历史和要素的弱点，并借鉴了法律委员会最近的改革建议，强调了改革的理由。在此过程中，本文认为改革辩论中忽略了一个重要的理论问题：数子句原则。