header-logo header-logo

Losing the farm in a family feud

27 June 2019 / Jennifer Haywood
Issue: 7846 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate , Property
printer mail-detail

Jennifer Haywood uncovers some valuable lessons on proprietary estoppel from recent Court of Appeal decisions

  • How courts satisfy the equity in proprietary estoppel cases.
  • Explores three recent Court of Appeal cases where parties fell out over the family farm.

Farming families have given rise to a rich vein of proprietary estoppel cases, and the question of how to satisfy the equity in such cases is often particularly troublesome. Lessons can be drawn from three such cases which reached the Court of Appeal in recent years, Davies v Davies [2016] EWCA Civ 463; Moore v Moore [2018] EWCA Civ 2669 and Habberfield v Habberfield [2019] EWCA Civ 890.

The legal principles which apply in proprietary estoppel cases are, save for a controversy about the aim to be achieved when seeking to satisfy the equity, fairly well established, and they were encapsulated by Lord Justice Lewison at para [38] of Davies. In short:

(i)The ingredients necessary to raise an equity are (a) an assurance of sufficient clarity;

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll