header-logo header-logo

16 June 2011
Issue: 7470 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Estoppel

Grievson v Grievson [2011] EWHC 1367 (Ch), [2011] All ER (D) 58 (Jun)

When it came to estoppel by representation or promissory estoppel, it was unlikely that a claimant would be able to satisfy the test of unconscionability unless he could also satisfy the three classic requirements. They were: (a) a clear representation made by the defendant upon which it was reasonably foreseeable that the claimant would act; (b) an act on the part of the claimant which was reasonably taken in reliance upon the representation or promise; and (c) after the act had been taken, the claimant being able to show that he would suffer detriment if the defendant was not held to the representation or promise.

With regard to estoppel by convention, the principles applicable were, inter alia, that it was not enough that the common assumption upon which the estoppel was based was merely understood by the parties in the same way. It had to be expressly shared between them, and the expression of the common assumption by the party alleged to be estopped had to

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll