Image from Google Jackets

Yaxley v Gotts and another

Series: Weekly Law Reports ; [1999] 3 WLR, 1217-1243(14)Publication details: 1999Subject(s): Summary: CA 24 June 1999. The 2nd defendant offered Y (a builder) the ground floor of a house he proposed to purchase, on condition that Y would convert the property into flats and then manage them. The offer was made verbally. In fact, it was the second defendant's son, G, who purchased the property. Y believed the second defendant to be the owner and supplied materials, labour and management services. Y and G subsequently fell out, and G refused to grant Y an interest in his property. The judge granted Y ownership, due to proprietary estoppel and ordered G to grant a 99 year lease to Y. The defendants appealed under the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 s2, which requires all contracts for sale of disposal of land to be made in writing. Appeal held, as oral agreements can be enforced under a constructive trust.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS61727 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 103446-1001

CA 24 June 1999. The 2nd defendant offered Y (a builder) the ground floor of a house he proposed to purchase, on condition that Y would convert the property into flats and then manage them. The offer was made verbally. In fact, it was the second defendant's son, G, who purchased the property. Y believed the second defendant to be the owner and supplied materials, labour and management services. Y and G subsequently fell out, and G refused to grant Y an interest in his property. The judge granted Y ownership, due to proprietary estoppel and ordered G to grant a 99 year lease to Y. The defendants appealed under the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 s2, which requires all contracts for sale of disposal of land to be made in writing. Appeal held, as oral agreements can be enforced under a constructive trust.