header-logo header-logo

22 June 2018
Issue: 7798 / Categories: Bar Council , Legal News , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Leaving the farm: Gee v Gee & anor

A son whose father made longstanding promises to leave the £8m family farm to him has succeeded in his claim

John Gee junior had worked long hours for low wages since the 1970s with the expectation he would take over ‘the lion’s share’ of the farm, but in 2014 it was transferred to his brother Robert.

Mr Justice Birss awarded John junior a 52% controlling interest in the farm and 48% interest in the land. Robert Gee retained a minority shareholding and interest in the land.

Commenting on Gee v Gee & anor [2018] EWHC 1393 (Ch) for LexisNexis Legal Analysis, Shoosmiths partner Adam Draper said: ‘Birss J was satisfied that a proprietary estoppel had been made out over the farm.’

He said John junior’s claims was helped by an earlier will, supportive evidence from his mother and sister, and evidence given by John senior that contradicted itself.

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll