Nicola Pauline West v Wendy Elizabeth Churchill & Anor

Nicola Pauline West v Wendy Elizabeth Churchill & Anor

The first defendant’s defence and counterclaim relied on without prejudice communications made during unsuccessful settlement negotiations, which are inadmissible under the without prejudice rule. The estoppel exception to the rule exists in law, but the first defendant failed to show a properly arguable case for proprietary estoppel, as there was no clear and unequivocal representation, no reasonable reliance, and no detriment. Therefore, the relevant parts of the defence and counterclaim were struck out and summary judgment granted on those issues.

Parties
Claimant: Nicola Pauline West; First Defendant: Wendy Elizabeth Churchill; Second Defendant: Jemma Salter
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil (chancery Division, Property, Trusts and Probate) / Application for Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment on Parts of Defence and Counterclaim
Outcome
Application granted; relevant parts of defence and counterclaim struck out; summary judgment granted on those issues; declaration as to statutory trusts made.
Legal Topics
Without Prejudice Rule, Proprietary Estoppel, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications, Inheritance (provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, Administration of Estates
Trusts and Estates Civil Procedure Without Prejudice Rule Proprietary Estoppel Summary Judgment Strike Out Applications Inheritance (provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 Administration of Estates

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 3 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nicola Pauline West

Claimant

Wendy Elizabeth Churchill

First Defendant

Jemma Salter

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (chancery Division, Property, Trusts and Probate) / Application for Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment on Parts of Defence and Counterclaim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether parts of the first defendant’s defence and counterclaim relying on without prejudice communications should be struck out as an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the estoppel exception to the without prejudice rule applies to the facts pleaded
  3. 3 Whether the first defendant has a properly arguable case for proprietary estoppel based on settlement negotiations

Ratio Decidendi

The first defendant’s defence and counterclaim relied on without prejudice communications made during unsuccessful settlement negotiations, which are inadmissible under the without prejudice rule. The estoppel exception to the rule exists in law, but the first defendant failed to show a properly arguable case for proprietary estoppel, as there was no clear and unequivocal representation, no reasonable reliance, and no detriment. Therefore, the relevant parts of the defence and counterclaim were struck out and summary judgment granted on those issues.

Court Disposition

Application granted; relevant parts of defence and counterclaim struck out; summary judgment granted on those issues; declaration as to statutory trusts made.

Orders

  • Relevant parts of the first defendant’s defence and counterclaim struck out as an abuse of process for relying on without prejudice communications.
  • Summary judgment granted in favour of the claimant on those issues.