The plaintiff sought a declaration of beneficial ownership of residential property occupied rent-free for years, or alternatively damages, on the basis of proprietary estoppel arising from an alleged promise that the property would be left to her by will.
The court held that the evidence did not establish an unambiguous assurance intended to be taken seriously, and that any reliance on such an alleged promise was unreasonable in light of the surrounding circumstances, including later solicitor correspondence and trust documentation preserving the registered owner's control.
The court further found no detriment because the claimed repairs and improvements were ordinary incidents of occupation and were outweighed by the substantial benefit of rent-free residence.
The defendant's statutory counterclaim for wrongful registration of a certificate of pending litigation also failed because the claim to an interest in land was reasonably advanced and no actual damages were proven.
The action was dismissed, vacant possession was ordered within 90 days, and the CPL was discharged.
