Peter Martin Conway v Stephen Conway & Anor

Peter Martin Conway v Stephen Conway & Anor

Section 2 bars the grant of specific performance or enforcement of an oral contract for the sale of land; proprietary estoppel cannot override this statutory prohibition unless relief is not tantamount to enforcing the void contract. The Judge erred in granting specific performance based on proprietary estoppel; only alternative equitable relief such as compensation for detriment may be considered.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Peter Martin Conway; Respondent/defendant: Stephen Conway; Respondent/defendant: Amber Meek
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 January 2026
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From County Court Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Judge's order set aside; matter remitted for determination of alternative equitable relief.
Legal Topics
Proprietary Estoppel, Law of Property (miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 Section 2, Specific Performance, Constructive Trust, Unjust Enrichment
Property Law Equity Proprietary Estoppel Law of Property (miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 Section 2 Specific Performance Constructive Trust Unjust Enrichment

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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Martin Conway

Appellant/claimant

Stephen Conway

Respondent/defendant

Amber Meek

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From County Court Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proprietary estoppel can be used to enforce an oral contract for the sale of land rendered void by s.2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989
  2. 2 Whether there was a binding oral agreement immediately enforceable
  3. 3 Whether proprietary estoppel can operate by implying terms into an oral agreement via open contract principles

Ratio Decidendi

Section 2 bars the grant of specific performance or enforcement of an oral contract for the sale of land; proprietary estoppel cannot override this statutory prohibition unless relief is not tantamount to enforcing the void contract. The Judge erred in granting specific performance based on proprietary estoppel; only alternative equitable relief such as compensation for detriment may be considered.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Judge's order set aside; matter remitted for determination of alternative equitable relief.

Orders

  • Judge's order granting specific performance set aside.
  • Matter remitted to County Court for determination of compensation or unjust enrichment based on proprietary estoppel equity.