Patrick v McKinley [2017] EWCA Civ 2068 (08 December 2017)

Patrick v McKinley [2017] EWCA Civ 2068 (08 December 2017)

The appeal turned on whether the trial judge was plainly wrong in finding that no promises or assurances were made by the respondent to the appellant regarding a proprietary interest in the properties or company shares. The Court of Appeal found no basis to overturn the judge's findings of fact, holding that the judge's assessment of credibility and the evidence was unimpeachable. The appellant failed to establish any error justifying appellate intervention.

Citation
[2017] EWCA Civ 2068
Parties
Appellant: Jason Patrick; Respondent: Daphne McKinley
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Constructive Trust, Proprietary Estoppel, Quantum Meruit, Findings of Fact, Appellate Review
Property Law Equity Civil Procedure Constructive Trust Proprietary Estoppel Quantum Meruit Findings of Fact Appellate Review

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jason Patrick

Appellant

Daphne McKinley

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant had a proprietary interest in the respondent's properties and company shares based on alleged promises or assurances
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was entitled to payment for work done on a quantum meruit basis
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge erred in findings of fact, particularly regarding credibility and the existence of alleged promises

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal turned on whether the trial judge was plainly wrong in finding that no promises or assurances were made by the respondent to the appellant regarding a proprietary interest in the properties or company shares. The Court of Appeal found no basis to overturn the judge's findings of fact, holding that the judge's assessment of credibility and the evidence was unimpeachable. The appellant failed to establish any error justifying appellate intervention.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No proprietary interest declared in favour of the appellant
  • No quantum meruit award to the appellant