Mr Cobbe, a project manager/developer, claimed that the landowner 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 agreement in principle for the development site's sale. Yeoman's Row Ltd owned
Knightsbridge land with 13 flats at 38-62 Yeoman's Row,
London,
SW3 2AH. They wanted to knock them down and build six terraced houses. One of the directors orally agreed with Mr Cobbe he would • at his own expense apply for planning to demolish the existing flats and put up the six-house terrace • after planning permission, and getting vacant possession the company would sell him the freehold for £12m • Mr Cobbe would develop the property as per the permission • 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. Cobbe, regardless, spent a lot of time and effort between 2002 and 2004 applying for planning. By late 2003 the company had decided to pull out, and to ask for more money up front, but still deliberately gave Cobbe 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, to be paid up front. He claimed
breach of contract. The company claimed this was doomed to fail, because of
LPMPA 1989 s 2. He claimed alternatively
proprietary estoppel,
constructive trust and/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,
Dyson and
Sir Martin Nourse, upheld that decision. ==Judgment==