Currie v Currie [No 2]

The case of Currie v Currie [No 2] involved the plaintiffs, the children of the first defendant's deceased brother, bringing an action against the first and second defendants, the first defendant's children. The plaintiffs sought to enforce a promise made by the first defendant that they would inherit the family farm. The dispute centred around the enforceability of this promise, which was alleged to have been made in the context of a farming family, where the plaintiffs were encouraged to rely on an expectation of inheriting the farm. The High Court of Australia heard the appeal.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the first defendant's promise to convey the farm to the plaintiffs was enforceable under the doctrine of proprietary estoppel. The court had to determine whether the plaintiffs had a clear and unequivocal assumption that they would inherit the farm, whether the first defendant's conduct encouraged this assumption, and whether it would be unconscionable for the first defendant to resile from the promise. Additionally, the court considered whether the plaintiffs had relied to their detriment on the promise and whether the first defendant's resiling from the promise was unconscionable.

The court held that the plaintiffs had established a clear and unequivocal assumption that they would inherit the farm, and the first defendant's conduct encouraged this assumption. The court found that the plaintiffs had indeed relied to their detriment on the promise by foregoing other employment opportunities. The court further held that it would be unconscionable for the first defendant to resile from the promise, given the extent of the plaintiffs' reliance and the encouragement provided. Consequently, the court found in favour of the plaintiffs and ordered a constructive trust over the farm in their favour. The court also dismissed the application to amend the defence, noting the extensive delay and lack of adequate reason for the delay, which would prejudice the plaintiffs and increase costs to other litigants awaiting trial dates.