Gordon v Havener (Antigua and Barbuda)

Michaelmas Term

[2021] UKPC 26

Privy Council Appeal No 0017 of 2020

JUDGMENT

Gordon (Appellant) v Havener (Respondent) (Antigua and Barbuda)

From the Court of Appeal of the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court (Antigua and Barbuda)

before

Lord Lloyd-Jones

Lord Kitchin

Lord Burrows

Lord Stephens

Lady Rose

JUDGMENT GIVEN ON

4 October 2021

Heard on 8 July 2021

Appellant

Tom Poole QC

Sara Ibrahim

(Instructed by Simons Muirhead Burton LLP (Newman Street))

Respondent

Dane Hamilton QC

(Instructed by Dane Hamilton & Associates)

LORD BURROWS:

1.         The essential facts and an overview of the dispute

1.                  This appeal is concerned with three plots of land at Dian Bay, Antigua. Contracts for the sale of those plots of land were made between a sister and her brother. The sister, the seller, is Mrs Jacqueline Havener and she is the defendant and the respondent in this appeal. The brother, the purchaser, is Mr Gregory Gordon and he is the claimant and the appellant in this appeal. Following the death of their mother, Margaret Ruth McNutt (also known as Ruth Gordon Livingston), Mrs Havener became the sole owner of the three plots of land. Mrs Havener lives in the United States. Although of no direct relevance to the matters on this appeal, in November 2005 Mrs Havener gave Mr Gordon a power of attorney to act on her behalf in certain matters but she revoked that in September 2009.

2.                  Mr Gordon alleges that, in breach of contract, Mrs Havener has failed to transfer the plots of land to him and that he should therefore be granted specific performance or damages for breach of contract. She alleges that he is in breach of contract by failing to pay the agreed purchase price under any of the three contracts. Mr Gordon further alleges that, if his claim for breach of contract fails, he should be awarded a remedy under the doctrine of proprietary estoppel as he has detrimentally relied on Mrs Havener’s promise to transfer to him the legal title in the plots of land.

3.                  The three plots of land are referred to as plot 117 (being part of parcel 59), plot 116 (being the other part of parcel 59) and plot 82B (being part of parcel 82). It is not in dispute that Mr Gordon already owns plot 83, which is next to plot 82, and already owns Gordon House, which is next to plot 117. It is also submitted on his behalf that, at the time of the contracts of sale, he was already the lessee of plots 116 and 117 under a 99-year lease granted by his mother and sister, dated 12 January 1979.

4.                  The first contract of sale, dated 15 June 2001, was for plot 117 and the agreed contract price was US$1,000. The second contract of sale, dated 27 August 2007, was for plot 116 and the agreed contract price was US$10. The third contract of sale, also dated 27 August 2007, was for plot 82B and the agreed…