Sentences with phrase «estoppel cases»

There are statements in the context of election and abandonment cases to the extent that the effect of the doctrines is suspensory only, but such cases are probably better thought of as promissory estoppel cases.

On a related note, the potential revocability of the loan forgiveness eligibility letters strikes me as teeing up the mother of all promissory estoppel cases.

She will handle complex disputes between executors and trustees, contested wills and proprietary estoppel cases as well as disputes involving financial abuse and maladministration.

Not exact matches

For example, in the recent Liden v Burton [2016] EWCA Civ 275, [2016] Fam Law 687 (proprietary estoppel: see next article) Hamblen LJ characterised the issues on appeal as: «(i) whether the judge wrongly applied the law to the facts as found; (ii) whether the judge erred in the exercise of his discretion in giving effect to the equity» in the particular case.

The jurisdiction cross-fertilises four separate areas of legal principle (sometimes all in the same case): constructive trusts; resulting trusts; proprietary estoppel and the separate jurisdiction under CA 1989, Sch 1.

In one of the leading cases, Stack v Dowden [2007] UKHL 17, [2007] 2 All ER 929, Barry Stack was the non-owning partner and claimant; and an important case on proprietary estoppel (Wayling v Jones (1993) 69 P & CR 170, [1995] 2 FLR 1029) concerned a same sex couple.

The defendants both moved for summary judgment on the grounds that Otis» position in this case was opposite of his position in the underlying case and the doctrine of judicial estoppel barred his negligence and 93A claims.

The application of judicial estoppel is to be decided on a case by case basis.

Additionally, the SJC rejected Otis» arguments that judicial estoppel should not be applied because: (1) Otis is bringing the present suit as an assignee of Cusick and is therefore presenting Cusick's claims, not his own; (2) Otis himself did not make inconsistent statement under oath concerning his comparative negligence; and (3) the SJC previously rejected use of judicial estoppel in cases of assignment of legal malpractice claims.

This case does not involve any factors, such as inadvertent mistake or newly discovered evidence, that might, on equitable grounds, relieve Otis from the application of judicial estoppel.

104 Walker L.J., in the passage from Thorner cited by Smith J.A., was of the view that in order to constitute proprietary estoppel, «the assurances given to the claimant (expressly or impliedly, or, in standing - by cases, tacitly) should relate to identified property owned (or, perhaps, about to be owned) by the defendant» (emphasis added).

The decision addressed the use of estoppel in a case involving a part - time worker who was trying to obtain additional vacation time according to the collective agreement she had worked under for more than 20 years.

A fascination of this case is to watch a judge treading a careful path between the technicalities of issue estoppel and a possible strike out on the one hand, balanced against a clear emphasis on the court's duty to protect the welfare of a child in the widest possible sense: the first a matter of analysis of law, the second a matter of pure discretion.

Baron J reviewed the authorities on issue estoppel and found herself in agreement with Re B and another (minors)(care proceedings: evidence)[1997] 1 FLR 285, [1997] 2 All ER 29 and Mrs Justice Hale (as she then was) that issue estoppel in children cases, in any strict sense, does not apply.

Brooke Lyne provides a master class in recent case law on estoppel by convention in residential service charge disputes

Does anyone actually think that it was counsel that contrived the doctrine of promissory estoppel and then offered it up to Denning J. in the High Trees Central London Property Trust Ltd v. High Trees House Ltd [1947] K.B. 130; [1956] 1 All E.R. 256 (Note); 62 T.L.R. 557; [1947] L.J.R. 77; 175 L.T. 333 case.

Although Faskens» mandatory retirement policy clearly established a prima facie case of age discrimination, the Supreme Court of Canada could have then examined whether it was justified for other reasons — either some sort of estoppel given that McCormick had benefited for years from the arrangement of forcing other partners to retire, or statutory exceptions such as a bona fide occupational requirement.

The case suggests that the bar for establishing estoppel may be low.»

This case raised issues relating to res judicata, Section 34 of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments and Estoppel by Convention.

Ian Roland and Michael Fenrick represented the Canadian Police Association before the Supreme Court of Canada in Penner v. Niagara Police Services Board, a case which raises the application of the doctrine of issue estoppel in the context of police discipline.

As a general rule, there was historically no doctrine of collateral estoppel in criminal cases as noted in a 1967 law review article.

This depends upon when a concept analogous to the principle of collateral estoppel (also known as «issue preclusion») in civil cases, in which facts previously litigated can bind a party in a later lawsuit, with or without constitutional double jeopardy dimensions, applies in criminal cases.

In a suit by the stepson against the landlord, the stepson probably can apply the ruling in the stepfather's case against the landlord in a binding way by collateral estoppel, although the landlord probably can't hold the stepson to rulings made against the stepfather in the same suit.

One case concerned a claim for equitable relief arising from an estoppel.

(And in the case of Member States, we should also take into account the «estoppel» argument, just like in Ratti, Emmott and plenty other cases.)

It is notable that this case draws little distinction between a claim brought under a constructive trust and one brought under proprietary estoppel.

Another probate case in the news recently involved two sisters who claimed that their father had promised to leave his # 231,000 estate to them and not to his second wife: their claim, on grounds of «proprietary estoppel», hinged on # 100 monthly payments they had made to him and his first (late) wife for 20 years.

In the U.S., any court can determine that a law is unconstitutional, but the extent to which that ruling is binding precedent on other courts or other parties than those to the case before it depends upon the court in question and upon the doctrine of collateral estoppel (a.k.a. issue preclusion).

The doctrine of collateral estoppel may apply when a criminal conviction is based on facts identical to the facts on which a civil case is based.

Weirton argued that this manifest disregard occurred in connection with (1) the arbitrator's disposal of the case on summary disposition; (2) the arbitrator's determination that all claims but one were barred by res judicata or collateral estoppel; (3) the arbitrator's conclusion that one of Weirton's claims was barred by the statute of limitations; and (4) the arbitrator's determination that, if not barred by res judicata, a number of Weirton's claims were barred by the gist - of - the action doctrine.

The Court agreed, and dismissed the lawsuit, however was critical of how ICBC handled the situation, and suggested that the outcome of the case may have been different had estoppel been plead.

Civil claims will continue, he adds, but «because the criminal conviction is wiped out, the plaintiffs can not rely on it as proof in their case, if my dim memory of collateral estoppel serves me right.»

Tags: Abuse of Process, bc injury law, Issue Estoppel, McClusky v. Desilets, Mr. Justice Steeves Posted in ICBC Liability (fault) Cases Direct Link 1 Comment» top ^

Even though the case law Samsung cites gives Judge Koh more than enough ammunition to at least stay the case, Samsung's lawyers also present an argument that would enable the district court to reject Apple's demand for premature enforcement even if the court interpreted the Federal Circuit's mandate the way Apple proposes: «Manifest injustice would warrant deviation from a decision rejecting, without briefing, collateral estoppel or a stay»

The court noted a change in the law did not trigger the «special circumstance» exception to issue estoppel, and found there was no basis to exercise its discretion to bar the application of issue estoppel in this case.

Recent cases have involved issues such as: adverse possession of farming land; nuisance due to flooding and contamination; a multi-party action for breach of contract as to farming subsidies, entitlements and negligence; and proprietary estoppel and a disputed trust of land action.

A few months ago, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court resculpted the landscape of paternity cases in K.E.M. v. P.C.S., 38 A. 3d 798 (Pa. 2012), by establishing a «best interests» standard in cases where the presumption of paternity by estoppel might apply.

Along with attorney Jeffrey S. Taylor, Michael successfully defended (not guilty in a bench trial) a claim on a personal guarantee valued in excess of $ 2,000,000.00 and alleged breach of fiduciary duty in a complex case which involved issues of estoppel, accord and satisfactory parol evidence, statute of frauds, unclean hands, breach of contract, burden shifting, constructive trust, Marital Settlement Agreements and bankruptcy issues.

Parties challenging patents under the post-issuance review proceedings authorized by the America Invents Act have long worried about estoppel in later district court cases if they lose before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

[2009] EWCA Civ 1397; [2010] 1 Lloyd's Rep 193; [2010] 2 All E.R. (Comm) 1243; [2010] I l Pr 10; [2009] 2 CLC 1003]; The Times 8th Feb 2010; — leading case on recognition under the Judgments Regulation of foreign judgments obtained in breach of London arbitration agreements, and issue estoppel.

The facts established in this case fall far short of what is required to establish proprietary estoppel.

As the Court of Appeal in Schwark held that the elements necessary to establish a proprietary estoppel were not made out in that case, I note that the observation by the court that «to establish unconscionability», one must meet the five - part test laid out by Fry J. in Willmott v. Barber, supra, is obiter to its decision.

Mentioning issue estoppel would have caused my page views to crash through the floor, which would have been a pity because there is a recent case that raises an interesting technical point about issue estoppel and standard of review.

C.A., Feb 7, 2013)(35295) May 2, 2014 Estoppel is unavailable to avoid the application of a clear legislative provision, including, as in the instant case, one that establishes a strict liability regulatory offence; the facts of this case support neither the due diligence defence nor the defence of officially induced error.

In Yeoman's Row the House of Lords had to decide whether or not the facts of the case gave rise to a successful claim by the respondent for proprietary estoppel.

Consequently, the case can be distinguished from one in which validity is challenged by a party to the agreement, where equitable remedies (eg proprietary estoppel) might be called upon to rescue a formally defective agreement.

In both cases the proprietary estoppel was established and the courts were left with considerable flexibility in deciding upon the appropriate remedy.

The House of Lords decision in the recent case of Yeoman's Row Management Ltd and anr v Cobbe [2008] UKHL 55, [2008] All ER (D) 419 (Jul) provides clarification in relation to the basis upon which proprietary estoppel can be successfully claimed.

The court decided that the fundamental aspects for the creation of proprietary estoppel as dictated by the case of Willmott v Barber [1880] 15 ChD 96, were in existence.

Enmax Energy Corp. v. TransAlta Generation Partnership 2015 ABCA 383 Arbitration — Estoppel Summary: The appellant appealed a chambers judge's decision where he held that the parties to an arbitration were not bound by a prior arbitration award involving the same parties, that a party (in this case, the respondent) was not estopped from taking certain positions in the current arbitration as a result of the prior arbitration decision, and that the doctrines of res judicata and issue estoppel did not apply to arbitrationEstoppel Summary: The appellant appealed a chambers judge's decision where he held that the parties to an arbitration were not bound by a prior arbitration award involving the same parties, that a party (in this case, the respondent) was not estopped from taking certain positions in the current arbitration as a result of the prior arbitration decision, and that the doctrines of res judicata and issue estoppel did not apply to arbitrationestoppel did not apply to arbitration awards.