Do you want BuboFlash to help you learning these things? Or do you want to add or correct something? Click here to log in or create user.



Tags
#land #law #proprietary-estoppel
Question
In [ case ], the landowner, an elderly lady, persuaded her younger brother and his wife to live with her when they returned to England from Australia. They spent over £700 (then a considerable sum of money) on improvements to the property, on the basis that the landowner encouraged them to believe that the survivor of them would be able to live in the property for life. The court did not give effect to this expectation, as the landowner wanted to sell the property and buy a smaller, cheaper one for herself. She had no other assets, so would not be able to do this if the claimants were awarded a right to reside for life. The court granted them a licence to occupy the property until their expenditure had been repaid. In effect, this was a money award rather than an award of a proprietary right in the land.
Answer
Dodsworth v Dodsworth (1973) 228 EG 1115

Tags
#land #law #proprietary-estoppel
Question
In [ case ], the landowner, an elderly lady, persuaded her younger brother and his wife to live with her when they returned to England from Australia. They spent over £700 (then a considerable sum of money) on improvements to the property, on the basis that the landowner encouraged them to believe that the survivor of them would be able to live in the property for life. The court did not give effect to this expectation, as the landowner wanted to sell the property and buy a smaller, cheaper one for herself. She had no other assets, so would not be able to do this if the claimants were awarded a right to reside for life. The court granted them a licence to occupy the property until their expenditure had been repaid. In effect, this was a money award rather than an award of a proprietary right in the land.
Answer
?

Tags
#land #law #proprietary-estoppel
Question
In [ case ], the landowner, an elderly lady, persuaded her younger brother and his wife to live with her when they returned to England from Australia. They spent over £700 (then a considerable sum of money) on improvements to the property, on the basis that the landowner encouraged them to believe that the survivor of them would be able to live in the property for life. The court did not give effect to this expectation, as the landowner wanted to sell the property and buy a smaller, cheaper one for herself. She had no other assets, so would not be able to do this if the claimants were awarded a right to reside for life. The court granted them a licence to occupy the property until their expenditure had been repaid. In effect, this was a money award rather than an award of a proprietary right in the land.
Answer
Dodsworth v Dodsworth (1973) 228 EG 1115
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Dodsworth v Dodsworth (1973) 228 EG 1115, the landowner, an elderly lady, persuaded her younger brother and his wife to live with her when they returned to England from Australia. They spent over £700 (then a

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs

Summary

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Details

No repetitions


Discussion

Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.