Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
JM v RM [2021] EWHC 315 (Fam)
(Family Division, Mostyn J, 22 February 2021)Abduction – Wrongful retention – Hague Convention application – Mother decided not to return to Australia with children – COVID 19...
Re A (A Child) (Hague Convention 1980: Set Aside) [2021] EWCA Civ 194
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), Moylan, Asplin LJJ, Hayden J, 23 February 2021)Abduction – Hague Convention 1980 – Return order made – Mother successfully applied to set aside due...
Disabled women more than twice as likely to experience domestic abuse
The latest data from the Office of National Statistics shows that, in the year ending March 2020, around 1 in 7 (14.3%) disabled people aged 16 to 59 years experienced any form of domestic abuse in...
The President of the Family Division endorses Public Law Working Group report
The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary has published a message from the President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, in which the President endorses the publication of the President’s...
HMCTS updates online divorce services guidance
HM Courts and Tribunals Service have recently updated the online divorce services guidance with the addition of guides for deemed and dispensed service applications, alternative service...
View all articles
Authors

PROPERTY:Shirt v Shirt [2012] EWCA Civ 1029

Sep 29, 2018, 18:21 PM
Slug : 2012ewcaciv1029
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Aug 10, 2012, 02:30 AM
Article ID : 99691

(Court of Appeal, Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury MR, McFarlane, Lewison LJJ, 27 March 2012) 

The son claimed ownership of a farm pursuant to proprietary estoppel or constructive trust. The father owned the farm but had run it with the son as a partnership. The son based his case on assertions by the father that the farm ‘would come to him' and that he relied on those assertions by taking on tasks in excess of that expected of an employee and for little money.

The judge rejected the son's claims and the son appealed. The judge's conclusion was one that had been open to him and his reasoning was a proper basis for that conclusion.

The judge gave an oral reserved judgment after the conclusion of trial. Upon receiving the transcript he made a number of amplifications. There was nothing objectionable in a judge making his reasoning clearer and more full but making new or contradictory points was another matter. In this case no injustice had been caused. Appeal dismissed.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from