Yeomans Row Management Ltd v Cobbe [2008] UKHL 55, [2008] All ER (D) 419 (Jul)
In a “subject to contract” case, a proprietary estoppel cannot ordinarily arise, because the would-be purchaser’s expectation of acquiring an interest in the property in question is subject to a contingency that is entirely under the control of the other party to the negotiations.
However, if two or more persons agree to embark on a joint venture which involves the acquisition of an identified piece of land and a subsequent exploitation of, or dealing with, the land for the purposes of the joint venture, and one of the joint venturers, with the agreement of the others who believe him to be acting for their joint purposes, makes the acquisition in his own name but subsequently seeks to retain the land for his own benefit, the court will regard him as holding the land on trust for the joint venturers.
Where an agreement is reached under which an individual provides money and services in return for a legal but unenforceable promise which the promissor, after the money has been paid and the services provided, refuses to carry out, the individual is entitled to a restitutionary remedy, since the consideration in return for which the money was paid and the services were provided would have wholly failed. In such a case the money paid, with interest thereon, can be recovered, together with a
fee for the services.
