Subject-Matter Index

Acquiescence. See Estoppel by convention—definition and application

Conduct. See Estoppel by conduct. Estoppel by convention

Estoppel by conduct

submission to jurisdiction of court

party submitting to jurisdiction by making application to court then unable to challenge jurisdiction—Registrar-General (H.M. Greffier) not joint party to application for declaration of legitimacy, since not required by statute to be joined to application and therefore not estopped: A Father v. H.M. Greffier (Royal Ct.), 2015 GLR 22

Estoppel by convention

definition and application

estoppel by convention may arise when both parties to transaction act on assumed and mistaken view of facts or law, assumption being shared by both or made by one and acquiesced in by other—estoppel precludes parties from denying truth of assumption if unjust to allow them (or one of them) to go back on it: Smith v. States Education Council (C.A.), 2000–02 GLR 350

Issue estoppel. See Res judicata—issue estoppel

Proprietary estoppel

applicability of doctrine

inappropriate to apply English doctrine of proprietary estoppel (Guernsey land law being based on Norman not English law), if application would cause hardship—hardship need only be merely contingent and not definite, e.g. potential hardship to property owner if mortgagee were to take saisie proceedings: Bougourd v. Woodhead (Royal Ct.), 2009–10 GLR 487

conduct

inference from conduct—assurance of legally enforceable interest in land to be necessary, not merely possible, inference from evidence: Roger v. Roger (C.A.), 2003–04 GLR 1

extent of equity

if estoppel raised, still need to conduct “analysis of fairness” of parties’ respective financial positions to see if still inequitable to allow occupier’s expectation to be defeated by enforcement of legal owner’s rights: Roger v. Roger (C.A.), 2003–04 GLR 1

Res judicata

cause of action estoppel

Court of Alderney determined in 2016 that right of way existed and directed Land Registrar to amend Alderney Land Register to record right of way as marked on plan—Court of Alderney had no jurisdiction to hear application in 2022 by owner of dominant property for declaration that right of way exists in location where it existed in 2016 and not as erroneously represented on plan—no special circumstances to disapply res judicata: Lewis v. Odoli (Royal Ct.), 2022 GLR N [3]

issue estoppel

broad principles of not wasting time and money preclude re-trial of same issue in different court, whether Guernsey court or elsewhere—not necessary to rely on technical doctrines of issue estoppel or res judicata: Ladbrokes PLC v. Galaxy Intl. Ltd. (Royal Ct.), 2007–08 GLR 101

no issue estoppel where second proceedings concerned different issues and different defendants: Kazzaz v. Standard Chartered Trust (Guernsey) Ltd. (Royal Ct.), 2023 GLR 223

presentation of whole case at same time

Henderson rule requiring party to bring whole case before court at same time not applicable where second proceedings concerned different issues and different defendants: Kazzaz v. Standard Chartered Trust (Guernsey) Ltd. (Royal Ct.), 2023 GLR 223

Henderson rule requiring party to bring whole case before court at same time not strictly based on res judicata or other category of estoppel—based on public policy of need for finality of litigation and avoiding oppression of defendant by multiple suits: Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees S.A. v. ITG Ltd. (Royal Ct.), 2015 GLR N [9]