Final answer:
The grantor of a condition subsequent estate may repossess the property if restrictions are violated, but unlike a determinable estate, this does not happen automatically and requires affirmative action within a certain time frame.
Step-by-step explanation:
The condition subsequent estate differentiates from a determinable estate in that the grantor may repossess the property within a limited time frame if restrictions, such as those outlined in restrictive covenants, are violated. Unlike an automatically ending determinable estate, a condition subsequent estate requires the grantor to take affirmative action to reclaim the property. Such covenants often regulate property usage by establishing parameters like minimum house sizes, setting setback lines, and ensuring aesthetic conformity.
For example, restrictive covenants have historically been used to control the demographic makeup of neighborhoods, with covenants sometimes illegally limiting the sale or rental of properties based on race or religion. However, when it comes to restrictive covenants and the right to enforce them, they must be reasonable, not violate public policy, and pertain to the property in question.
In essence, the grantor retains the right to enforce the terms of the estate and can invoke contractual rights to enforce the agreement. If restrictions are violated, the grantor does not automatically get the property back but can take legal action to repossess after a violation of the specified restrictive covenants.