Wayling v Jones

X promised P that in return for all the help P gave him in running his businesses, P would inherit them on X’s death. This did not happen under X’s will and P sued the estate, D, under proprietary estoppel for the business he ought to have received. CA allowed P’s claim, stating that once the plaintiff had shown that the promises were made, and that the plaintiff's conduct was such that inducement could be inferred, the burden of proof shifted to the defendants to establish that the plaintiff did not rely on those promises.