A coherent doctrine of Estoppel

A paper on the coherence of estoppel as a form of reliance-based claims in private law.

Contractual termination of leases: lessons from the Commonwealth - Part 2

In the second part of this article, the writers examine how far the English courts have acknowledged the application of the doctrine of frustration and acceptance of repudiation in the leasehold context.

Joint tenancies and English commorientes:a question of survivorship or severance?

The aim of this article is to provide a critical appraisal of the English law in relation to the doctrine of commorientes with particular reference to its implications in respect of property held on a joint tenancy. The article suggests a measure of reform which would produce a fairer dsitribution of joint property in circusmtances where all joint tenants have died in a common disaster and it cannot be ascertained which joint tenant died first.

Patients and doctors working together in partnership:Birch v UCL Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2008] EWHC 2237 (QB)

Of the myriad of pressing topics current in medical law and ethics, the issue of informed consent appears to be the ‘plainer sibling’. The decision by Cranston J in Birch v UCL Hospital NHS Foundation Trust in 2008 has brought into sharp relief that which many commentators already held to be true. Far from being the ‘plainer sibling’ when weighed against other prominent issues in medical law and ethics, the doctrine of informed consent, is one of the most significant principles to emerge in recent years.

Common mistake:theoretical justification and remedial inflexibility

Discusses the implications for the doctrine of common mistake of the Court of Appeal ruling in Great Peace Shipping Ltd v Tsavliris Salvage (International) Ltd on whether a contract for the hire of a ship was void on the ground of common mistake regarding the position of the ship. Reviews the origins of the doctrine of common mistake and the relationship between the doctrine and the implication of terms. Considers the determination of impossibility. Examines the role of equity in common mistake and remedial equitable intervention.

Undue influence and the family home

This book provides a comprehensive analysis of the doctrine of undue influence in the context of the family home and fully incorporates the recent House of Lords ruling in Royal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2) (2001). It is aimed predominantly at the legal practitioner, but will also act as a useful source of reference for academics and students of contract, land law and equity and trusts. Emphasis is placed on claims brought by spouses (usually the wife) seeking to set aside a charge over the matrimonial home made in favour of a lending institution. The role of lenders in this context is also examined in depth, as is the part played by the solicitor acting on behalf of the parties. Apart from providing an exposition of the doctrine and its key elements, the book also gives a broader outlook by examining the Commonwealth experience (notably in Australia, Canada and New Zealand) and suggesting an underlying concept of unconscionability as governing undue influence claims. There is also a separate chapter on remedies, as well as an appendix containing a number of draft pleadings for use by the legal practitioner. In the foreword, the Honourable Mr Justice Neuberger writes: 'Pawlowski and Brown are to be congratulated for having produced a book ...as comprehensive and user-friendly as this volume. Not only have they considered the effect of the authorities in a clear and logical way, but they have also highlighted problems which have yet to be resolved and questions which have yet to be answered ...one of the hallmarks of a good legal book.'