Owen v Costigan

Owen and Costigan were involved in a dispute concerning an oral arrangement to pay money and acquire equity in land. The matter was heard in the court, which had to determine the enforceability of an option agreement that had been entered into orally. The oral agreement was intended to be formalised in writing, but the written option agreement was not exercised. The primary issues before the court were whether the parties' oral arrangement could be rectified, whether estoppel applied, and whether an equitable charge existed.

The court examined the evidence and the circumstances surrounding the oral arrangement and the subsequent written agreement. It considered whether the written agreement accurately reflected the oral arrangement and whether there was sufficient evidence to support a claim for rectification. The court also explored the doctrine of estoppel, assessing whether any representation or assumption by the parties could be relied upon to prevent one party from going back on their word. Additionally, the court analysed the possibility of an equitable charge arising from the oral arrangement.

After considering the evidence and arguments presented, the court determined that the written agreement did not accurately reflect the oral arrangement and ordered rectification to reflect the true terms of the parties' agreement. The court found that estoppel applied, preventing one party from denying the existence of the oral agreement. Furthermore, the court recognised an equitable charge in favour of the party who had relied on the oral arrangement to their detriment. The court's decision provided relief to the party who had acted in reliance on the oral arrangement, ensuring that they were not left without recourse due to the failure to formalise the agreement in writing.