header-logo header-logo

Proprietary estoppel: Howe v Gossop

28 May 2021 / Caroline Shea KC , Thomas Rothwell
Issue: 7934 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail
49952
Caroline Shea QC & Thomas Rothwell examine the history & relationship between proprietary estoppel & a section 2 defence
  • Howe v Gossop: useful insight on the circumstances in which s 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 will (or will not) amount to a defence to a proprietary estoppel.

Ever since the important decision of the House of Lords in Cobbe v Yeoman’s Row Management Ltd [2008] UKHL 55, [2008] 4 All ER 713, there has been considerable debate about the interrelationship between s 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 (s 2) and the doctrine of proprietary estoppel. The former provision declares any contract for the sale or disposition of an interest in land which is not in signed writing to be void. A party seeking to establish an estoppel, however, will often seek to rely on unwritten promises or agreements as the central basis of his cause of action. The recent decision of Mr Justice Snowden in Howe

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

National Pro Bono Centre—Esther McConnell & Sarah Oliver Scemla

National Pro Bono Centre—Esther McConnell & Sarah Oliver Scemla

Charity strengthens leadership as national Pro Bono Week takes place

Michelman Robinson—Akshay Sewlikar

Michelman Robinson—Akshay Sewlikar

Dual-qualified partner joins London disputes practice

McDermott Will & Schulte—Karen Butler

McDermott Will & Schulte—Karen Butler

Transactions practice welcomes partner in London office

NEWS
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold dives into the quirks of civil practice, from the Court of Appeal’s fierce defence of form N510 to fresh reminders about compliance and interest claims, in this week's Civil Way
In this week's NLJ, Sophie Houghton of LexisPSL distils the key lesson from recent costs cases: if you want to exceed guideline hourly rates (GHR), you must prove why
With chronic underfunding and rising demand leaving thousands without legal help, technology could transform access to justice—if handled wisely, writes Professor Sue Prince of the University of Exeter in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) has restated a fundamental truth, writes John Gould, chair of Russell-Cooke, in this week's NLJ: only authorised persons can conduct litigation. The decision sparked alarm, but Gould stresses it merely confirms the Legal Services Act 2007
The government’s decision to make the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) the Single Professional Services Supervisor marks a watershed in the UK’s fight against money laundering, says Rebecca Hughes of Corker Binning in this week's NLJ. The FCA will now oversee 60,000 firms across legal and accountancy sectors—a massive expansion of remit that raises questions over resources and readiness 
back-to-top-scroll