Taylor Fashions V Liverpool Victoria Trustees
   HOME

TheInfoList



OR:

''Taylor Fashions Ltd and Old & Campbell Ltd v Liverpool Victoria Trustees Co Ltd'' 979is a leading case in
English land law English land law is the law of real property in England and Wales. Because of its heavy historical and social significance, land is usually seen as the most important part of English property law. Ownership of land has its roots in the feudal ...
on
proprietary estoppel Proprietary estoppel is a legal claim, especially connected to English land law, which may arise in relation to rights to use the property of the owner, and may even be effective in connection with disputed transfers of ownership. Proprietary esto ...
. Due to a common mistake and no element of enticement to believe that mistake, estoppel was not available on the facts.


Facts

The claimants were two companies, Taylor Fashions Ltd and Old & Campbell Ltd, who held leases on two business premises on Westover Road,
Bournemouth Bournemouth () is a coastal resort town in the Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole council area of Dorset, England. At the 2011 census, the town had a population of 183,491, making it the largest town in Dorset. It is situated on the Southern ...
. Both companies asked to have their leases renewed by their landlord, the Liverpool Victoria Trustees Co Ltd. All parties had assumed that the two leases were accompanied by a statutory right of renew when they came to an end. Based on this assumption, both of the claimant companies had spent money improving their premises. However, it transpired that Liverpool Victoria was under no legal obligation to renew. The claimants argued that Liverpool Victoria should be estopped from not renewing, based on their reliance. In response, Liverpool Victoria argued that estoppel was not relevant because they had not acted unconscionably but simply by mistake.


Judgment

Oliver J noted that Mr Scott and Mr Essayan for the claimants said: one’s state of mind was irrelevant. Mr Millett for Liverpool Victoria argued that unconscionability was necessary, following Fry J in the earlier leading case of '' Willmott v Barber''. The judge noted: Oliver J clarified that ''Willmott'' was only a case applicable to situations where someone had stood by without protest as his rights were infringed.151-152 Knowledge of one of the parties alleged to be estopped is just one of many relevant factors. One should consider all the circumstances. On the facts of the case, the claim by Taylor Fashions failed, with 'regret', because they had not been encouraged in their belief by Liverpool Victoria. Old & Campbell, however, did succeed because they had been encouraged to spend a very large sum in the belief that they could renew.


Significance

The case underlines the importance of businesses renting leased premises to be well-advised before entering into their leases, and in particular to be aware of the pitfall of doing authorised works without business security of tenure. It also underlines the importance of clear communication with the landlord as a clear written promise from the landlord that the business tenants could renew their premises leases, having looked at the leases, would have enabled the business tenants to benefit somewhat from the works they had carried out.


See also

*
Estoppel Estoppel is a judicial device in common law legal systems whereby a court may prevent or "estop" a person from making assertions or from going back on his or her word; the person being sanctioned is "estopped". Estoppel may prevent someone from ...


Notes


References

*N Gravells (ed), ''Landmark Cases in Land Law'' (2013) {{DEFAULTSORT:Taylor Fashions and Old and Campbell v Liverpool Victoria Trustees English contract case law English land case law High Court of Justice cases 1982 in United Kingdom case law