Lissimore v Downing [2003] EWHC B1 (Ch) (31 March 2003)

Lissimore v Downing [2003] EWHC B1 (Ch) (31 March 2003)

The claimant failed to establish that the defendant made representations or assurances relating to the Astbury Estate sufficient to found a proprietary estoppel. The alleged statements were either too vague or not connected to specific property, and the claimant's conduct did not amount to substantial detriment induced by a promise of a proprietary interest. The claim for a beneficial interest in the Astbury Estate was dismissed.

Citation
[2003] EWHC B1 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Sarah Lissimore; Defendant: Kenneth Downing
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 March 2003
Procedural Posture
Originating Application and Part 8 Claim / Trial of Preliminary Issue
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Proprietary Estoppel, Constructive Trust, Beneficial Interest, Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996
Property Law Equity Proprietary Estoppel Constructive Trust Beneficial Interest Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996

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 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sarah Lissimore

Claimant

Kenneth Downing

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Originating Application and Part 8 Claim / Trial of Preliminary Issue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant established a beneficial interest in the Astbury Estate by virtue of proprietary estoppel
  2. 2 Whether representations or promises by the defendant gave rise to an equity in favour of the claimant
  3. 3 Whether the claimant acted to her detriment in reliance on assurances

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to establish that the defendant made representations or assurances relating to the Astbury Estate sufficient to found a proprietary estoppel. The alleged statements were either too vague or not connected to specific property, and the claimant's conduct did not amount to substantial detriment induced by a promise of a proprietary interest. The claim for a beneficial interest in the Astbury Estate was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • No declaration of beneficial interest in the Astbury Estate
  • No order for payment of lump sum to claimant