Servitudes to be interpreted to promote the intent of the parties and not strictly construed

The Utah Supreme Court joined others in adopting the modern view that servitudes (restrictive covenants) should be interpreted to effectuate the intent of the parties, rather than interpreting them strictly so as to maximize the rights of the owner of the burdened property, as the traditional rule held. Fort Pierce Ind. Park Phases II, III & IV Owners Ass’n v. Shakespeare, (Utah 2016).