Uglow v Uglow [2004]


  • The claimant expected to inherit a farm following assurances as to inheritance under a partnership agreement with the deceased, irrespective of the fact that the partnership broke down prior to the deceased’s death (but after detriment had been suffered by the claimant)


  • Was the claimant entitled to the farm by virtue of proprietary estoppel?


  • No


  • Proprietary estoppel may only be relied upon where a representation is unqualified, both explicitly and implicitly
  • The deceased’s representations were implicitly qualified by a requirement of success of the partnership
RELATED CASE  Mortgage Corporation v Shaire [2001]

Posted in Land Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 24th April 2015

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy