BCL Law Notes > University Of Oxford BCL Law Notes > Restitution of Unjust Enrichment Notes

Estoppel Notes

This is a sample of our (approximately) 4 page long Estoppel notes, which we sell as part of the Restitution of Unjust Enrichment Notes collection, a Distinction package written at University Of Oxford in 2014 that contains (approximately) 91 pages of notes across 13 different documents.

Learn more about our Restitution of Unjust Enrichment Notes

The original file is a 'Word (Docx)' whilst this sample is a 'PDF' representation of said file. This means that the formatting here may have errors. The original document you'll receive on purchase should have more polished formatting.

Estoppel Revision

The following is a plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Restitution of Unjust Enrichment Notes. This text version has had its formatting removed so pay attention to its contents alone rather than its presentation. The version you download will have its original formatting intact and so will be much prettier to look at.



1. All or nothing I. Avon CC v Howlett - showed how estoppel can operate only as an all or nothing defence. Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale - showed how change of position,


divorced from the rule of evidence strictures of estoppel, can operate in a pro tanto fashion.

2. Burrows view on this
- The pro tanto fashion is more appropriate for UE as it can be

geared to the precise extent of the loss of enrichment He's anti-estoppel and hope that change of position will supplant estoppel completely in UE - although he accepts estoppel should

not disappear in other areas of law

3. Maddaugh's view
- As long as estoppel remains it gives the defendant who can satisfy its more stringent requirements an unwarranted complete defence


1. Explained
- Burrows - the essence of the defence is that D has detrimentally relied on a representation from C that the benefit is his to keep. Where it is established, it is an all or nothing defence - as opposed to change of position which is pro tanto

2. When has it applied?
- It's only ever been applied in the context of mistaken payment. Otherwise, it would be very rare that C would ever say D can have the benefit to keep


****************************End Of Sample*****************************

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Restitution of Unjust Enrichment Notes.