Armitage Holdings Inc v Delahunty [2007] EWHC 1556 (Ch) (22 June 2007)

Armitage Holdings Inc v Delahunty [2007] EWHC 1556 (Ch) (22 June 2007)

Mr Delahunty failed to establish on the balance of probabilities that any significant sum is outstanding for unpaid work, failed to prove any actionable agreement for £600,000 or flats, and failed to demonstrate detrimental reliance necessary for proprietary estoppel regarding the Flat. Most dishonoured cheques were...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 1556 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant and Part 20 Defendant: Armitage Holdings Inc.; Defendant and Part 20 Claimant: Patrick Joseph Delahunty; Part 20 Defendant: The personal representatives of Donald Garrett Deceased; Part 20 Defendant: Blackfriars Land Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Trial / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim for possession granted; Part 20 claims dismissed except for one dishonoured cheque against Blackfriars.
Legal Topics
Proprietary Estoppel, Gratuitous Licence, Contractual Remuneration, Dishonoured Cheques, Corporate Veil
Property Law Contract Law Equity Proprietary Estoppel Gratuitous Licence Contractual Remuneration Dishonoured Cheques Corporate Veil

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Armitage Holdings Inc.

Claimant and Part 20 Defendant

Patrick Joseph Delahunty

Defendant and Part 20 Claimant

The personal representatives of Donald Garrett Deceased

Part 20 Defendant

Blackfriars Land Limited

Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Trial / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Delahunty is entitled to unpaid remuneration for building works
  2. 2 Whether Mr Delahunty is entitled to £600,000 or flats at Tooley Street and Grange Road
  3. 3 Whether Mr Delahunty has a proprietary estoppel entitling him to occupy Flat 2, 12-14 Cotswold Street rent-free

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Delahunty failed to establish on the balance of probabilities that any significant sum is outstanding for unpaid work, failed to prove any actionable agreement for £600,000 or flats, and failed to demonstrate detrimental reliance necessary for proprietary estoppel regarding the Flat. Most dishonoured cheques were satisfied or not actionable; only one cheque against Blackfriars was found unsatisfied and actionable.

Court Disposition

Claim for possession granted; Part 20 claims dismissed except for one dishonoured cheque against Blackfriars.

Orders

  • Possession order for Flat 2, 12-14 Cotswold Street to Armitage Holdings Inc., possession to be delivered up by 1st October 2007.
  • Claim for unpaid remuneration, £600,000, and flats dismissed.