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

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll