- Cited — Lee Hudson v Jayne Hathway 2022-12-14
“…In Yaxley v Gotts [2000] Ch 162 Robert Walker LJ said much the same thing about the relationship between constructive trusts and proprietary estoppel at 176, although, as we will see, he late…”
- Cited — Lee Hudson v Jayne Hathway 2022-12-14
“… 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 about the notion that proprietary estoppel and “common interest” constructive trusts can or shou…”
- Explained — Kahrmann v Harrison-Morgan 2019-11-27
“…This was clearly explained by Beldam LJ (a former Chairman of the Law Commission) in Yaxley v Gotts [2000] Ch. 162 at 188-193. As he said, at 191A:…”
- Cited — Generator Developments Ltd v LIDL UK GmbH 2018-03-08
“… with those applicable to proprietary estoppel. He quoted the observation of Robert Walker LJ in what was then the very recently decided case of Yaxley v Gotts [2000] Ch 162 that:…”
- Cited — Farrar v Miller 2018-02-14
“…Mr Cohen continues that older authorities suggesting otherwise should now be put to rest, including Yaxley v Gotts [2000] Ch 162. Further, it would be wrong to suggest that the inclusion of constructive trust in s.2(5) catches a proprietary estoppel, for although a proprietary estoppel m…”
- Explained — Farrar v Miller 2018-02-14
“…rietary estoppel nevertheless frustrate the policy behind s.2? A number of matters point to the conclusion it does not. First, as Beldam LJ explained in Yaxley [2000] Ch 162 at 188 to 191, the 1989 Act was intended to implement three reports of the Law Commission, including, of particular importance to this appeal, Report No. 164, …”