So there are two issues: (c) shouldn't be able to sell without the restriction, and (b) knowing of the restriction made decisions in good faith believing it would be followed and hence have been harmed by it not being followed, no? If (b) doesn't have standing, nobody does and deed restrictions are de facto useless.

▲

IG_Semmelweiss an hour ago | parent [-]

(a) has to sue and they will prevail.

(b) does not have standing.

▲

sleepybrett an hour ago | parent [-]

.. and if A is dead?

	▲	HWR_14 43 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Property rights would inherit. So one of their relatives or heirs. If they had no one to inherit the restriction it would go to the state - but the state would have gotten the land unrestricted in that case anyway.