Proprietary estoppel

Proprietary estoppel

• Occurs in three situations

1. Where a person mistakenly believes that they have an existing right in land and the real owner acquiesces in this belief;

2. Where a person is encouraged by the owner of land to believe they have an existing right in land; and

3. Where a person is led by the owner to believe that they will have a right the future if they act in a certain way.

Ramsden

• Owner of large estate, permitted people to build homes on estate. Tenants of will. R wanted to kick someone out and could - no proprietary right.

• no clear encouragement to lease = no estoppel
  Equity only intervenes when there is a mistake in an existing right. Tenanrs knew it was precarious and only had a lease if ramsden said.
  
  Kingsdown - Where a landowner allows them to build things on the land on mistaken belief they will own it they should get it due to encouragement. - expectation.

Crabb v Arum DC

• Arun promisd Crabb easement for acess, built a fence with a gap and he lied on this. sold land and did not give easement for other acess point on reliance of arun. - CA get acess through proprietary estoppel.

• Equity mitigates the rigours of strict law. - Denning.

Scarman in Crabb v Arun DC

Framework:
1. Has an equity arisen? -

• Clear promise/representation creating a belief/expectation

• Unconscionability (see Taylors Fashions (1982))

2. What is the extent of the equity? - Reliance loss - value lost? Expectation- give what expected?

3. What relief is appropriate to satisfy the equity? - Wide descretion d can decide.
- Injunction, grant interest in property, property on constructive trust
Proprietary estoppel = cause of action.
Extends proprietary estoppel to promises.

Guest v Guest

1. c gets 50% of business value and 40% value of farm. - Oneourus

2. Clean break + future promise considered.

3. D either farm on trust w life interest/ payment with discount for acceleration.

Purpose: prevent unconsionability, upholds Jennings v Rice

Lionel smith :

• Flxibility is not random, prevents unfairness when someone has relied on a promise/ representation