Proprietary and promissory estoppel: recent academic commentary on Luo Xing Juan Angela v Estate of Hui Shui See Willy

I have already posted a blog entry on this case. This post draws attention to some critical commentary on the decision in recent case notes. Kelvin F.K. Low (‘Luo Xing Juan Angela v Estate of Hui Shui See Willy, Deceased: family property and interposed companies’, [2009] Conveyancer and Property Lawyer 524) suggests that the CFA  applied ‘proprietary estoppel principles in the context of a promissory estoppel claim.’ (at 528) In ‘Disputes over family homes owned through companies: constructive trust or promissory estoppel?’ (2009) 125 Law Quarterly Review 25) Rebecca Lee and Lusina Ho criticise the decision for a variety of reasons. As far as promissory estoppel is concerned, they argue that the CFA relaxed, almost to the point of abandoning, the requirement of a pre-existing legal relationship between the parties. They make the point that, in effect, promissory estoppel was used to found a cause of action.

Advertisement

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: