No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 January 2025
1 E.g. Bailey, , “Recent Cases: Chandler v. Kerley” (1979) 53 A.L.J. 92Google Scholar; Hardwick v. Johnson [1978] 2 All E.R. 935, 938h, 940e.
2 E.g. Allen v. Snyder [1977] 2 N.S.W.L.R. 685.
3 E.g. Tanner v. Tanner [1975] 1 W.L.R. 1346; Pearce v. Pearce [1977] 1 N.S.W.L.R. 170.
4 Pascoe v. Turner [1979] 2 All E.R. 945; Davies, , “Informal Arrangements Affecting Land” (1979) 8 Sydney Law Review 578.Google Scholar
5 Shaw v. Shaw [1954] 2 Q.B. 429; Stinchcombe v. Thomas [1957] V.R. 509; Deglman v. Guaranty Trust Co. of Canada [1954] 3 D.L.R. 785.
6 E.g. Pearce v. Pearce [1977] 1 N.S.W.L.R. 170; Eves v. Eves [1975] 3 All E.R. 768.
7 E.g. Bruch, , “Property Rights of De Facto Spouses Including Thoughts on the Value of Homemakers’ Services” (1976) 10 Family Law Quarterly 101Google Scholar; Steinem, , “The Implied Partnership” (1974) 26 University of Florida Law Review 221Google Scholar; Chaachou v. Chaachou (1961) 136 So. (2d) 206.
8 Goff, and Jones, , The Law of Restitution (2nd ed. 1978)Google Scholar; Waters, , “Matrimonial Property Disputes-Resulting and Constructive Trusts—Restitution” (1975) 53 Canadian Bar Review 366.Google Scholar
9 E.g. Atiyah, , “When is an Enforceable Agreement Not a Contract? Answer: When it is an Equity” (1976) 92 L.Q.R. 174Google Scholar (in praise of contract); Oughten, , “Proprietary Estoppel: A Principled Remedy” (1979) 129 New Law Journal 1193Google Scholar, Davies, , “Informal Arrangements Affecting Land” (1979) 8 Sydney Law Review 578Google Scholar (in praise of proprietary estoppel); Waddams, , “Legislation and Contract Law” (1979) 17 University of Western Ontario Law Review 185Google Scholar; Waddams, , “Unconscionability in Contracts” (1976) 39 Modern Law Review 369CrossRefGoogle Scholar (unconscionability).
10 [1978] 2 All E.R. 935. Cf. Crabb v. Arun District Council [1976] Ch. 179, 193 per Scarman L.J.: “I do not think that, in solving the particular problem raised by a particular case, putting the law into categories is of the slightest assistance”; Marvin v. Marvin (1976) 557 P. 2d 106, 123, n. 25 per Tobriner J.: “Our opinion does not preclude the evolution of additional equitable remedies to protect the expectations of the parties to a nonmarital relationship in cases in which existing remedies prove inadequate; the suitability of such remedies may be determined in later cases in light of the factual setting in which they arise”; followed by the Superior Court of California in Marvin v. Marvin (1979) 5 Fam.L.R. 3077, 3085.
11 [1978] 2 All E.R. 935, 940.
12 E.g. Pearce v. Pearce [1977] 1 N.S.W.L.R. 170; Tanner v. Tanner (1975] 1 W.L.R. 1346.
13 [1978] 1 W.L.R. 693.
14 Bailey, op. cit. 94.
15 Ibid.
16 [1978] 1 W.L.R. 693.
17 Cf. Horrocks v. Forray [19761 1 W.L.R. 230.
18 Cf. Eves v. Eves [1975] 3 All E.R. 768; Pearce v. Pearce [1977] 1 N.S.W.L.R. 170.
19 [1975] 1 W.L.R. 1346.
20 [1976] 1 W.L.R. 230.
21 Bailey, , “Legal Recognition of De Facto Relationships” (1978) 52 A.L.J. 174, 184.Google Scholar
22 Id. 185.
23 [1976] 1 W.L.R. 230.
24 Id. 239 per Megaw L.J.
25 [1975] 1 W.L.R. 1346.
26 Note the variety of interests awarded in realty under contract, trust or pro-prietary estoppel concepts in family disputes: Appleton v. Appleton [1965] 1 All E.R. 44 (husband, half); Jansen v. Jansen [1965] 3 All E.R. 363 (husband, £1,000 interest); Smith v. Baker [1970] 2 All E.R. 826 (wife, half); McRae v. Wholley, 15 August 1975, unreported decision of Jones J., Supreme Court of Western Australia (wife, half); Doohan v. Nelson [1973} 2 N.S.W.L.R. 320 (husband, deferred whole interest); Horton v. Public Trustee [1977] 1 N.S.W.L.R. 182 (wife, whole interest); Olsen v. Olsen [1977] 1 N.S.W.L.R. 189 (wife, whole interest); Fraser v. Gough [1975] 1 N.Z.L.R. 138 (male, one-third); Cooke v. Head [1972] 1 W.L.R. 518 (wife, one-third); Eves v. Eves [1975] 3 All E.R. 768 (wife, deferred quarter interest while maintenance paid); Valent v. Salamon, 8 December 1976, unreported decision of Holland J., Supreme Court of New South Wales (wife, 21.22%!!); Pearce v. Pearce [1977] 1 N.S.W.L.R. 170 (wife, lifelong irrevocable licence to occupy); Tanner v. Tanner [1975) 1 W.L.R. 1346 (wife, irrevocable licence to occupy until children reach 18 years); Richards v. Dove [1974] 1 All E.R. 88 (wife, no interest in house; basically half interest in furniture); Leibrandt v. Leibrandt (1976) F.L.C. 90-058 (wife, half); Ogilvie v. Ryan [1976) 2 N.S.W.L.R. 504 (wife, licence to occupy rent-free for life); Hardwick v. Johnson [1978] 2 All E.R. 935 (daughter-in-law, licence to reside undefined period); Pascoe v. Turner [1979) 2 All E.R. 945 (wife, whole); Hohol v. Hohol (1980) F.L.C. 90-824 (wife, half farm).
27 [1977] 2 N.S.W.L.R. 685; Wade, , “Trusts, The Matrimonial Home and De Facto Spouses” (1979) 6 University of Tasmania Law Review 97.Google Scholar
28 [1979] 2 All E.R. 945 (Orr, Lawton, Cumming-Bruce L.JJ.); Sufrin, , “Notes of Cases: An Equity Richly Satisfied” (1979) 42 Modern Law Review 574Google Scholar; also Jackson v. Crosby (No. 2) (1979) 21 S.A.S.R. 280.
29 Wallace, and Grbich, , “A Judge’s Guide to Legal Change in Property: Mere Equities Critically Examined” (1979) 3 University of New South Wales Law Journal 175; 194-204Google Scholar; Zuckerman, , “Formality and the Family-Reform and Status Quo” (1980) 96 L.Q.R. 248Google Scholar; Wade, , De Facto Marriages.in Australia (1981).Google Scholar