Chan Pui Chen v Leung Kam Ho

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtCourt of Appeal (Civil Division)
Judgment Date2002
Year2002
Date2002

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
  • Lee Hudson v Jayne Hathway
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division
    • 21 March 2022
    ...[1986] Ch 638 (per Nourse LJ at 648G-H); Eves v. Eves [1975] 1 WLR 1338, CA; Hammond v. Mitchell [1991] 1 WLR 1127; and Chan Pui Chun v. Leung Kam Ho [2003] 1 FLR 23, per Jonathan Parker LJ at 37 Ms Saunders submitted further that even if analogies from contract law were permissible, consid......
  • Magali Moutreuil v Peter Richard Andreewitch
    • United Kingdom
    • Family Division
    • 29 July 2020
    ...Law of Real Property (9 th ed.): i) Giving up a career or educational opportunities: see Ottey v Grundy [2003] EWCA Civ 1176 and Chun v Ho [2003] 1 FLR 23); ii) The claimant “positioned his whole life on the basis of the assurance given to him and reasonably believed by him”: Davies v Davie......
  • Gareth Hughes v Carys Pritchard
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 24 March 2022
    ...when evaluating the extent of detriment, a benefit must be taken into account if it is enjoyed as a consequence of the reliance ( Chan v Leung [2003] 1 FLR 23) ([109]). He went on to note that if an estoppel is established, the court has a wide discretion as to the remedy which should be gr......
  • Virendra Kumar v. Sumintra Arjun
    • Fiji
    • High Court (Fiji)
    • 18 June 2019
    ...inferred common intention from the parties' entire course of conduct (e.g. Gissing, Hammond v. Mitchell [1992] 1 WLR 1127, Chan v. Leung [2003] 1 FLR 23, Stack, Kernott, Geary v. Rankine [2012] EWCA Civ 555) where evidence of common intention can come from a wide-raging of factors which are......
  • Get Started for Free