 Yaxley v Gotts

o Y is a builder who works for G. Y wants to buy a house and

renovate and convert to flats.
o Contract would have had to be in legal writing to take effect, and it
was not, LP(MP)A
o Y had at one point asked for a written agreement but they had left
it as a gentleman’s agreement.
o The flats were completed and G exluded Y completely from the
property and Y was not happy.
o Y made 2 arguments:
 1. He had an oral agreement with G’s which somehow
bound them – this argument never going to work because it’s
contrary to statute, the agreement needs to be written
 2. G made a representation that Y would become owner of
the flats and Y relied upon that and sent money s a result
and undertook services as a result and G knew all about it. Y
wanted a declaration saying that he was entitled to a long
lease of the ground floor or payment equivalent to value of
long lease (vague application of duration of lease), a
quantum meruit.
o There is suspicion that G’s knew that Y wasn’t going to be able to
enforce rights over the property, on the verge of fraud.
o Y is arguing for an oral agreement to be enforced. He made a
bargain – did services in exchange for long lease. He thinks he
deserves a long lease.