- Cited — Lee Hudson v Jayne Hathway 2022-12-14
“…Grant v Edwards [1986] Ch 638 is a very important case for two reasons. First, the judgment clearly differentiated between what was needed in order to establish a beneficial interest of som…”
- Cited — Lee Hudson v Jayne Hathway 2022-12-14
“… developing law in this area, and briefly discussed proprietary estoppel, a suggestion first put forward by Sir Nicolas Browne-Wilkinson V-C in Grant v Edwards [1986] Ch 638, 656. I have myself given some encouragement to this approach (Yaxley v Gotts [2000] Ch 162, 177) but I have to say that I am now rather less enthusiastic abou…”
- Cited — Lee Hudson v Jayne Hathway 2022-12-14
“…ases”. At a high level of generality, there is of course a single regime: the law of trusts (this is the second of Mustill LJ’s propositions in Grant v Edwards [1986] Ch 638, 651). To the extent that we recognise that a “common intention” trust is of central importance to “joint names” as well as “single names” cases, we are going …”
- Cited — O'Neill v Holland 2020-11-27
“…In Grant v Edwards [1986] Ch 638 (CA), the well-known case of a cohabiting couple where the house in which they lived had been conveyed into the joint names of the first defendant and his brot…”
- Cited — O'Neill v Holland 2020-11-27
“…detrimental reliance on the part of the claimant is an essential feature of this kind of case. BrowneWilkinson V-C put it clearly in Grant v Edwardsand Another [1986] Ch 638… at 654…”