000			01358cab a22002655a 4500
001			L146015
008			081201e20081121xxko f g 000 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u146015
041	0		_aeng
100	1		_aChambers, Kate
245	0	0	_aYeoman's scope
260			_c2008
490			_aNew Law Journal _v158(7346) 21 November 2008, 1629-1630(2)
505			_aLooks at the decision in Yeoman's Row Management Ltd & Anor v Cobbe and the subsequent court of appeal ruling (which was eventually overturned by the House of Lords on the matter of proprietary estoppel). The author highlights the clarification provided in relation to establishing a claim for proprietary estoppel and suggests that the scope for such claims will be narrowed and simplified in future. She goes on to add that the result of the House of Lords case reinforces the need for business arrangements to be protected by legally enforceable contracts.
520			_aReaders may also wish to view the case online (L144655).
590			_aKA
650	2	4	_aYEOMAN'S ROW MANAGEMENT LTD AND ANOTHER V COBBE
650	2	4	_aCRABB V ARUN DC
650	2	4	_aRAMSDEN V DYSON
650	2	4	_aTAYLOR FASHIONS LTD V LIVERPOOL VICTORIA TRUSTEES CO LTD
650	2	4	_aWILLMOTT V BARBER
651		4	_aEngland and Wales _y1543-
690			_aPROPERTY-PROPERTY ACQUISITION AND DISPOSAL
942			_n0
999			_c80998 _d80998