翻訳と辞書 Words near each other ・ Cobb's Tavern ・ Cobb's wren ・ Cobb, California ・ Cobb, Georgia ・ Cobb, Indiana ・ Cobb, Kentucky ・ Cobb, Oklahoma ・ Cobb, Texas ・ Cobb, West Virginia ・ Cobb, Wisconsin ・ Cobban ・ Cobban, Wisconsin ・ Cobbe ・ Cobbe family ・ Cobbe portrait ・ Cobbe v Yeoman's Row Management Ltd ・ Cobbel ・ Cobbelsdorf ・ Cobber ・ Cobberas Range ・ Cobbett ・ Cobbett Association ・ Cobbetts ・ Cobbetts Pond ・ Cobbing ・ Cobbins Brook ・ Cobbinshaw ・ Cobbinshaw railway station ・ Cobbinshaw Reservoir ・ Cobbitty, New South Wales Dictionary Lists mini英和辞書 mini和英辞書 Webster 1913 Latin-English FOLDOC Wikipedia English ウィキペディア

翻訳と辞書　辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ] スポンサード リンク Cobbe v Yeoman's Row Management Ltd ： ウィキペディア英語版 Cobbe v Yeoman's Row Management Ltd ''Cobbe v Yeoman's Row Management Ltd'' () (UKHL 55 ) is a House of Lords case in English land law and relates to proprietary estoppel in English land law. ==Facts== Mr Cobbe, a developer, claimed that Yeoman’s Row Ltd had sat by and encouraged him to go to great expense in obtaining planning permission for a development, and should not be able to resile from an originally agreed oral contract price for development work. Yeoman’s Row Ltd was controlled by Mr and Mrs Lisle-Mainwaring, and owned Knightsbridge land with 13 flats at 38-62 Yeoman’s Row, London, SW3 2AH. They wanted to knock them down and build six terraces. Mrs Lisle-Mainwaring orally agreed with Mr Cobbe he would (1) at his own expense apply for planning to demolish the existing flats and put up the six house terrace (2) after planning permission, and getting vacant possession the company would sell him the freehold for £12m (3) Mr Cobbe would develop the property as with the permission (4) the six houses would be sold and half the proceeds in excess of £24m would be given over. Both knew nothing was, as yet, binding. Still Mr Cobbe spent a lot of time and effort between 2002 and 2004 applying for planning. By late 2003 Mrs Lisle-Mainwaring had decided to pull out, and to ask for another £12m up front, but she deliberately gave him the impression that they would continue. Mr Cobbe got planning in March 2004, and the value was rising so fast it had increased by another £4m without work having even begun. Mrs Lisle-Mainwaring then said she wanted £20m up front. He claimed breach of contract (doomed to fail, because of LPMPA 1989 s 2) and proprietary estoppel, constructive trust or unjust enrichment. Etherton J found on proprietary estoppel in Mr Cobbe’s favour, and awarded £2m, equal to half of the increase in value of Yeoman Row’s freehold caused by the grant in the planning permission. The Court of Appeal, Mummery LJ, Dyson LJ and Sir Martin Nourse, upheld this decision. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Cobbe v Yeoman's Row Management Ltd」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.