Salvation Army Trustee Co Ltd v West Yorkshire Metropolitan County Council: 1980

Threatened with a road widening, the plaintiffs left their old property, and began to develop their new one, again, on land owned by the respondent. In practice it was negotiated as an exchange of properties. The negotiations were held ‘without prejudice’ but treated as if it were ‘subject to contract’
Held: ‘In the case of a normal arrangement to sell where there is no contract it would be virtually impossible to rely on the principle of proprietary estoppel’. An estoppel can arise in circumstances where an agreement ‘subject to contract’ has been made, but in order to do so, it must be based on something other than the ‘subject to contract’ agreement alone. In these very singular circumstances, the ‘irretrievably interwoven’ dealings were such that the defendant could not lawfully withdraw from the proposal for compulsory purchase of the old site.

Judges:

Woolf J

Citations:

(1980) 41 P and CR 179

Cited by:

ApprovedAttorney General of Hong Kong v Humphreys Estate (Queen’s Gardens) Ltd PC 1987
An agreement in principle was marked ‘subject to contract’. The Government would acquire some flats owned the plaintiff Group of companies in return for the Government granting, inter alia, a lease to the Group of some Crown lands. The Government . .
CitedConfetti Records (A Firm), Fundamental Records, Andrew Alcee v Warner Music UK Ltd (Trading As East West Records) ChD 23-May-2003
An agreement was made for the assignment of the copyright in a music track, but it remained ‘subject to contract’. The assignor later sought to resile from the assignment.
Held: It is standard practice in the music licensing business for a . .
CitedGonthier and Another v Orange Contract Scaffolding Ltd CA 25-Jun-2003
The question of a proprietary estoppel as between landlord and tenant arose. An agreement had been reached subject to contract for the grant of a lease, with an option to purchase. The tenant was allowed into possession before the documentation was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Estoppel

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.183740