Betting the farm - Remedial roulette in proprietary estoppel: Guest v Guest [2022] UKSC 27

Abstract

The dispute in 'Guest v Guest' will be depressingly familiar to anyone with a passing familiarity with proprietary estoppel. David, the patriarch of a farming family, promised to leave the better portion of the farm to his eldest son, Andrew, who would, it was envisaged, ultimately leave it to his children. In reliance on this promise first made to him as a teenager, Andrew dedicated the better part of his life to working on the family farm, receiving meagre wages and foregoing the opportunity to strike out on his own. Decades later, David and Andrew fell out. David excised Andrew from his will, dashing his expectations of inheritance. Because David's promise was never committed to writing and, even if it had been, was too uncertain to constitute a contractual offer, Andrew's only hope of redress lay in proprietary estoppel. Andrew succeeded at trial. The judge ordered that the farm and its related business be sold and awarded Andrew expectation damages calculated as a proportion of each.