Inroduction to property law - Essay Example

legal right to the property could have been rightfully established, however in the absence of this legal claim, his rights must be established through proprietary estoppel. The commonly accepted definition of proprietary estoppel is as provided by Oliver J in the case of Taylors Fashions Ltd v Liverpool Victoria Trustees Co Ltd2 is that proprietary estoppel may be established in this cases where “it would be unconscionable for a party to be permitted to deny that, which, knowingly or unknowingly, he has allowed or encouraged another to assume to his detriment.

” Therefore, in applying this to the case of Derek, it may be possible to establish that it would be unconscionable for Pam as the legal title holder, to now sell the house and ask Derek to move into an old people’s home to his detriment, when the house was supposed to be a home for all of them, and Derek has been making mortgage payments all the while on the basis of this assumption. Moreover, at the time of purchase of the house, the main objective was not only to provide a home for them but also to enable Derek to be able to take in lodgers so that he could be provided with an income in his old age, which is also the reason why Derek has assumed the primary financial burden in making mortgage payments on the house.

Hence, it would be unconscionable to now expect him to vacate the house and move into an old age home. The objective of proprietary estoppel is to establish interest and proprietary interest in providing a remedy in the event of a property transfer where legal formalities fall just short of what is required3. Proprietary estoppel was invoked in the case of Yaxley and Gotts v Another4 in providing just such a remedy. The issue in this case was the dispute over whether an oral contract did indeed exist between the parties and whether this could provide justification for the issue of a remedy.

However, as pointed out by Justice Robert Walker in his judgment, proprietary estoppel was