Preedy & Anor v Dunne & Ors

Preedy & Anor v Dunne & Ors

No promises or assurances were made by the trustees or beneficiaries to Jonathan Dunne entitling him to occupy the premises for life or until repayment; any loans for renovations were to the business, not to the trust. Proprietary estoppel and contractual licence claims fail as there was no binding commitment or acquiescence by the trustees or beneficiaries.

Parties
Claimant: Raymond William Preedy; Claimant: Philip Thomas Baker; Defendant: Jonathan Anthony Dunne; Defendant: Blue Mango Investment Holdings Limited; Defendant: A3 Trading Limited (trading as Albert Arms Pub)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 October 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Judgment for the Claimants
Legal Topics
Proprietary Estoppel, Trustee Powers, Beneficiary Rights, Contractual Licence
Property Law Trusts and Estates Proprietary Estoppel Trustee Powers Beneficiary Rights Contractual Licence

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raymond William Preedy

Claimant

Philip Thomas Baker

Claimant

Jonathan Anthony Dunne

Defendant

Blue Mango Investment Holdings Limited

Defendant

A3 Trading Limited (trading as Albert Arms Pub)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proprietary estoppel arises in favour of Jonathan Dunne against the trustees and beneficiaries of the will trust for occupation of the property
  2. 2 Whether trustees can bind beneficiaries by promises or assurances
  3. 3 Whether a contractual licence exists entitling Jonathan Dunne to occupy the premises

Ratio Decidendi

No promises or assurances were made by the trustees or beneficiaries to Jonathan Dunne entitling him to occupy the premises for life or until repayment; any loans for renovations were to the business, not to the trust. Proprietary estoppel and contractual licence claims fail as there was no binding commitment or acquiescence by the trustees or beneficiaries.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Claimants

Orders

  • Order for possession of The Albert Arms Public House in favour of the Claimants
  • Consequential matters to be agreed or dealt with at hand-down if not agreed