header-logo header-logo

28 May 2021 / Caroline Shea KC , Thomas Rothwell
Issue: 7934 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Proprietary estoppel: Howe v Gossop

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 v Gossop [2021] EWHC 637 (Ch), [2021]

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