Ghazaani v Rowsham [2015]

Key Points of the Case:

• Background: This case involved the application of proprietary estoppel (PE) following the transfer of land.

• Claim: The claimant sought to enforce a right based on an informal agreement, despite the absence of a written contract.

• Outcome: The court upheld the claim, establishing that PE could arise even after the transfer of land, similar to the principles in Kinane v Mackie-Conteh.

• Reasoning: The court recognised that PE was an appropriate remedy for the unconscionable conduct of the defendant. It emphasised that the absence of a written contract did not preclude the application of PE.

• Impact: The decision underscored that PE can address exceptional circumstances where formalities are not met, highlighting its role in remedying situations where unconscionable conduct would otherwise go unaddressed.