Preedy & Anor v Dunne & Ors

Preedy & Anor v Dunne & Ors

No common understanding or assumption was established between the trustees and Jonathan Dunne that the trustees were partners in the pub business or liable for the renovation loans; the loans were to the pub business, not the trustees, and no estoppel by convention arose.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Raymond William Preedy; Claimant/respondent: Philip Thomas Baker; Defendant/appellant: Jonathan Anthony Dunne; Defendant/appellant: Blue Mango Investment Holdings Limited; Defendant/appellant: A3 Trading Limited (trading as Albert Arms Pub)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Proprietary Estoppel, Estoppel by Convention, Trustee Authority, Partnership, Contractual Licence
Trusts Property Estoppel Proprietary Estoppel Estoppel by Convention Trustee Authority Partnership 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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raymond William Preedy

Claimant/respondent

Philip Thomas Baker

Claimant/respondent

Jonathan Anthony Dunne

Defendant/appellant

Blue Mango Investment Holdings Limited

Defendant/appellant

A3 Trading Limited (trading as Albert Arms Pub)

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether estoppel by convention was established between the trustees and Jonathan Dunne
  2. 2 Whether trustees could be bound by the actions or assumptions of one trustee
  3. 3 Whether trustees were liable to repay loans advanced for renovations as alleged partners in the pub business

Ratio Decidendi

No common understanding or assumption was established between the trustees and Jonathan Dunne that the trustees were partners in the pub business or liable for the renovation loans; the loans were to the pub business, not the trustees, and no estoppel by convention arose.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed