header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
24 November 2023 / Sukhninder Panesar
Issue: 8050 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Informal land rights, estoppel & Spencer

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
147360
Sukhninder Panesar covers recent developments affecting proprietary estoppel, including a son’s claim to the farm he was promised
  • Explains that the doctrine of proprietary estoppel is not affected by the Law of Property Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1989.
  • Covers the case of Spencer v Spencer & Ors, concerning a son’s claim to the family farm.

In a recent decision of the High Court in Michael John Spencer v Estate of John Mitchell Spencer (Deceased), Penelope Anne Spencer, Jane Mary Flower [2023] EWHC 2050 (Ch), [2023] All ER (D) 66 (Aug) the court was asked whether an informal right in law could be established using the doctrine of proprietary estoppel thereby bypassing the need to comply with writing. This article explores the decision in this case and explains that the jurisprudence of the High Court is cementing into the common law of England and Wales a firmly established principle that the equitable doctrine of proprietary estoppel is not affected by s 2(1) of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Regulatory team boosted by partner hire amid rising health and safety demand

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Legal director promoted to partner at specialist pensions firm

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Residential development capability expands with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Mazur and more—inside the litigation frontline

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

NLJ this week: Social media bans for children spark legal dilemmas
Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
NLJ this week: Leasehold reform risks creating ‘forgotten freeholders’
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
NLJ this week: Court of Appeal clarifies when a claim truly begins
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
NLJ this week: Split FDRs could ease pressure—and boost settlements
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll