Murphy v Brown [2004]

Key Points of the Case:

• Background: The case involved a dispute over proprietary estoppel (PE) related to the nature of an informal agreement between parties.

• Claim: The claimant sought to establish a PE claim based on an alleged assurance regarding property rights.

• Outcome: The court found that the fluid and uncertain nature of the parties' relationship meant that no clear assurance could be identified.

• Reasoning: Due to the lack of a definitive and unequivocal promise, PE could not be established. The court emphasised the need for a clear and certain assurance to support a PE claim.

• Impact: The case highlighted the importance of clarity in the assurances needed for a successful PE claim, demonstrating that uncertainty in the relationship or promises made can undermine the claim's viability.