‘The mechanics of proprietary estoppel’

“What is the difference between, on the one hand, Yeoman’s Row Management Ltd v Cobbe [2008] UKHL 55 and, on the other hand, Thorner v Majors [2009] UKHL 18? The standard answer is that Cobbe involved commercial parties who, well, ought to have known better than to rely on an incomplete agreement (no unconscionability), whereas, in Thorner, we were dealing with the delightfully taciturn farmers of the Quantock Hills (unconscionability in the circs). In Ely v Robson [2016] EWCA Civ 774, the Court of Appeal had to deal with a situation between two cohabitants who had fallen out after a 16 year relationship …” (more)

[Nearly Legal: Housing Law News and Comment, 10 August]

(Visited 3 times, 1 visits today)

Leave a Reply