Sorry to the promissory estoppel people but this was Proprietary
Estoppel , Promise, Reliance, Detriment and the case are

Dillwyn v. Llewellyn
Ramsden v. Dyson (to some degree)
Taylor Fashions Ltd v. Liverpool Victoria Trustee Co Ltd
Yeoman’s Row Management Limited and Another V. Cobbe
Willmott v. Barber (1880)
Phoenix Smyth v. John Joseph Halpin and another10
McCaron v. McCaron and most recently C.D v. J.D.F

Promissory estoppel can only be used as a shield and has nothing to do
with the exam question posed. You had to go through each section and
throw out a case Promise, Reliance, Detriment and include the whole
Testamentary disposition (small note on valid will , codicil etc ) and
the overall likelihood of success for John which to my mind was zero
and in any event a court would likely award some damages in stead of
denying the common law right of his sister.



On Oct 5, 7:01 pm, Jev <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hmm... seems I hit reply to author instead of reply.
>
> Anyway, the jist of what I was saying is that the question was on
> proprietary!
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FE-1 
Study Group" group.
 To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
 For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.ie/group/fe-1-study-group?hl=en-GB
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to