Herbert v Doyle & Anor

Herbert v Doyle & Anor

The court allowed the Defendants to amend their pleadings post-judgment, but only in relation to claims for leases of the compressor house, staff room extension, and the parking space, as these constitute certain interests in land for proprietary estoppel. Amendments relating to building works and installation of gates were refused as they do not qualify as certain interests in land. Exceptional circumstances were found due to the procedural posture and balance of justice between the parties.

Parties
Claimant: Julian Roger Herbert; Defendants: Leonard Doyle and Another
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 September 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Judgment Application to Amend Pleadings Before Order Is Perfected
Outcome
Application to amend allowed in part
Legal Topics
Proprietary Estoppel, Amendment of Pleadings, Damages in Lieu of Injunction, Declarations, Post Judgment Procedure
Property Law Civil Procedure Proprietary Estoppel Amendment of Pleadings Damages in Lieu of Injunction Declarations Post Judgment Procedure

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Julian Roger Herbert

Claimant

Leonard Doyle and Another

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Judgment Application to Amend Pleadings Before Order Is Perfected

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendants may re-amend their amended defence and counterclaim after judgment but before order is perfected
  2. 2 Whether proprietary estoppel applies to the interests claimed
  3. 3 Whether the proposed amendments plead a 'certain interest in land' as required by law

Ratio Decidendi

The court allowed the Defendants to amend their pleadings post-judgment, but only in relation to claims for leases of the compressor house, staff room extension, and the parking space, as these constitute certain interests in land for proprietary estoppel. Amendments relating to building works and installation of gates were refused as they do not qualify as certain interests in land. Exceptional circumstances were found due to the procedural posture and balance of justice between the parties.

Court Disposition

Application to amend allowed in part

Orders

  • Defendants permitted to amend their defence and counterclaim to include claims for leases of the compressor house, staff room extension, and parking space F2 or equivalent.
  • Amendments relating to completion of building works and installation of gates refused.