[2008] UKHL 55, 30 July 2008. Where a property developer had reached an oral agreement in principle with a property owner to buy their property and expend time and expense in obtaining planning permission pursuant to the agreement but the owner subsequently refused to enter into a binding contract, the remedy could not be based on estoppel or constructive trust. Developer was entitled to quantum meruit payment for his services. Appellant company (Y) appealled against a developer (C) establishing propriety estoppel against it and being entitled to a lien over a property to secure his interest. Y had been formed to purchase a block of flats with the potential for development. Y and C then entered into a contract where Y would sell the property to C for £12 million pounds, C would then use his own means to obtain planning permission, develop the site and then pay 50% of any profit made over £24 million to Y. Y then sought to re-negotiate the agreement and C applied for estoppel. Held: The remedy due to C could not be construed as estoppel or a constructive trust and it fell to the court to determine how his claim might best be remedied. Property was never a joint venture and could not be treated as such. Y was unjustly enriched as it obtained the benefits of planning permission without paying for it and the remedy of quantum meruit had to be paid to C in light of the service it had provided to Y (the obtaining of planning permission).