Proprietary Estoppel in UK Law
-
Yeoman's Row Management Ltd and another v Cobbe
“
An "estoppel" bars the object of it from asserting some fact or facts, or, sometimes, something that is a mixture of fact and law, that stands in the way of some right claimed by the person entitled to the benefit of the estoppel. The estoppel becomes a "proprietary" estoppel - a sub-species of a "promissory" estoppel - if the right claimed is a proprietary right, usually a right to or over land but, in principle, equally available in relation to chattels or choses in action.
These ingredients should include, in principle, a proprietary claim made by a claimant and an answer to that claim based on some fact, or some point of mixed fact and law, that the person against whom the claim is made can be estopped from asserting. To treat a "proprietary estoppel equity" as requiring neither a proprietary claim by the claimant nor an estoppel against the defendant but simply unconscionable behaviour is, in my respectful opinion, a recipe for confusion.
The question arises, therefore, whether a complete agreement for the acquisition of an interest in land that does not comply with the section 2 prescribed formalities, but would be specifically enforceable if it did, can become enforceable via the route of proprietary estoppel. The proposition that an owner of land can be estopped from asserting that an agreement is void for want of compliance with the requirements of section 2 is, in my opinion, unacceptable.
-
Lloyds Bank Plc v Rosset and Others
“
The first and fundamental question which must always be resolved is whether, independently of any inference to be drawn from the conduct of the parties in the course of sharing the house as their home and managing their joint affairs, there has at any time prior to acquisition, or exceptionally at some later date, been any agreement, arrangement or understanding reached between them that the property is to be shared beneficially.
-
Gillett v Holt
“
Moreover the fundamental principle that equity is concerned to prevent unconscionable conduct permeates all the elements of the doctrine.
-
Evan John Tegwyn Davies and Another v Elizabeth Eirian Davies
“
One line of authority takes the view that the essential aim of the discretion is to give effect to the claimant's expectation unless it would be disproportionate to do so. The two approaches, in their starkest form, are fundamentally different: see Cobbe v Yeoman's Row Management Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 1139, [2006] 1 WLR 2964 at [120] (reversed on a different point [2008] UKHL 55; [2008] 1 WLR 1752).
-
Herbert v Doyle and Another
“
Applying what Lord Walker said in relation to proprietary estoppel also to constructive trust, that common thread is that, if the parties intend to make a formal agreement setting out the terms on which one or more of the parties is to acquire an interest in property, or, if further terms for that acquisition remain to be agreed between them so that the interest in property is not clearly identified, or if the parties did not expect their agreement to be immediately binding, neither party can rely on constructive trust as a means of enforcing their original agreement.
-
Land Registration Act 2002
... ... that it would be unconscionable because of an equity by estoppel for the registered proprietor to seek to dispossess the applicant, but ... 116: Proprietary estoppel and mere equities: It is hereby declared for the avoidance of ... ...
-
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
... ... as excluding the operation of the general law of contract or estoppel in relation to an informal waiver or other transaction in relation to any ... been granted for an invention any person having or claiming a proprietary" interest in or under the patent may refer to the comptroller the question\xE2\x80" ... ...
-
Proprietary Estoppel and Responsibility for Omissions
The ‘acquiescence’ category of proprietary estoppel is a rare example of responsibility for pure omissions in private law. On liberal‐individualistic theories of ownership, the policy consideration...
-
Hopes, Expectations and Revocable Promises in Proprietary Estoppel
This note dicusses the House of Lords' decisions in Cobbe v Yeoman's Row Management Ltd (Cobbe) and Thorner v Major (Thorner) regarding the nature and scope of proprietary estoppel. It considers th...
- Proprietary Estoppel in a Procrustean Bed
-
Straight through Certainty and Out the Other Side: Section 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 and Proprietary Estoppel
In the quest for certainty in the disposition and transferral of interests in land, Section 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 utilises formality at the expense of a wider...
- What Is Proprietary Estoppel?
- Successful Proprietary Estoppel Claim
-
Periodic Tenancies and Proprietary Estoppel: Not all smoke and mirrors
In Smoke Club Ltd and others v Network Rail Infrastructure Limited, the Upper Tribunal held that the claimants had an inferred periodic tenancy but no claim under proprietary estoppel. A lease of a...
- The Principle Of Proprietary Estoppel