Hoyl Group Ltd v Cromer Town Council

Cromer Town Council encouraged Hoyl Group Limited to believe it had or would have a right of way via the garden, Hoyl acted to its detriment in reliance on that belief, and Cromer's subsequent denial of the right was unconscionable. Proprietary estoppel arose, entitling Hoyl to a right of way.

Parties: Claimant/respondent: Hoyl Group Limited; Defendant/appellant: Cromer Town Council
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 23 July 2015
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome: Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Proprietary Estoppel, Right of Way, Easements, Acquiescence, Encouragement, Unconscionability

Property Law Equity Proprietary Estoppel Right of Way Easements Acquiescence Encouragement Unconscionability

Case Brief

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2

Parties

Hoyl Group Limited

Claimant/respondent

Cromer Town Council

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether Hoyl Group Limited is entitled to a right of way over land owned by Cromer Town Council under proprietary estoppel
2 Whether Cromer Town Council encouraged or allowed Hoyl Group Limited to believe it had or would have a right of way
3 Whether Hoyl Group Limited acted to its detriment in reliance on such belief

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

Hoyl Group Limited is entitled to a right of way via a new private gate in the garden wall as determined by the trial judge
Cross appeal by Hoyl Group Limited does not arise