In 2022, Olivia and Rob sold and transferred a piece of land next to their home to their neighbour, Zack. Soon after the conveyance, Zack agreed to do some work for Olivia and Rob, in return for payment of £50,000. When the work was completed, Olivia and Rob said they were no longer in the position to pay the £50,000 but could, instead, transfer additional land to Zack instead. Zack orally agreed to this in 2023, but it was never committed to writing. Zack immediately began to excavate the newly identified plot of land and started to build a summer house and recreational area on it, as an extension to the garden on his own plot. In 2024, Olivia and Rob fell out with Zack and, during the dispute, Olivia and Rob sought to assert their possession of the land in question.
Which of the following statements most accurately describes the applicable advice to Zack in this situation?

Question

In 2022, Olivia and Rob sold and transferred a piece of land next to their home to their neighbour, Zack. Soon after the conveyance, Zack agreed to do some work for Olivia and Rob, in return for payment of £50,000. When the work was completed, Olivia and Rob said they were no longer in the position to pay the £50,000 but could, instead, transfer additional land to Zack instead. Zack orally agreed to this in 2023, but it was never committed to writing. Zack immediately began to excavate the newly identified plot of land and started to build a summer house and recreational area on it, as an extension to the garden on his own plot. In 2024, Olivia and Rob fell out with Zack and, during the dispute, Olivia and Rob sought to assert their possession of the land in question. 
 Which of the following statements most accurately describes the applicable advice to Zack in this situation?

Answer

While Zack may arguably have an interest, he has chosen to unilaterally enforce it by trespassing on the land of another and will not, therefore, be entitled to assert any right he may have had

Answer

The extent of the work he has undertaken on the basis of the promise that land would be transferred to him instead of payment is enough for an equity to be established in  Zack’s favour

Answer

Zack would be entitled to £50,000 as this is what the parties initially contracted and is the only evidence the court will have to decide on a fair outcome

Answer

Unfortunately for Zack, he should have known not to rely on a verbal commitment and should have insisted on payment of the agreed sum. What happens subsequently is entirely at his own risk and he cannot demand anything for his error

Crowdly

In 2022, Olivia and Rob sold and transferred a piece of land next to their home ...

Want instant access to all verified answers on moodle.kent.ac.uk?