<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD with OASIS Tables with MathML3 v1.4 20241031//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/archiving/1.4/JATS-archive-oasis-article1-4-mathml3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" dtd-version="1.4" article-type="research-article" xml:lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="ru">Образование и право</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn publication-format="print">2076-1503</issn></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.24412/2076-1503-2026-7-201-205</article-id><article-categories><subj-group><subject>Other</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title xml:lang="ru">Доктрина estoppel by deed в английском праве</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>The doctrine of estoppel by deed under english law</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Игнатов</surname><given-names>Алексей Александрович</given-names></name><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Ignatov</surname><given-names>Aleksey Aleksandrovich</given-names></name></name-alternatives><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"/><email>aleksey1998ignatov@gmail.com</email></contrib><aff-alternatives id="aff1"><aff><institution xml:lang="en">Postgraduate Researcher, Russian State Academy of Intellectual Property, Department of Civil and Business Law Scientific Supervisor:</institution></aff></aff-alternatives><aff-alternatives id="aff2"><aff><institution xml:lang="ru">аспирант ФГБОУ ВО «Российская государственная академия интеллектуальной собственности», кафедра гражданского и предпринимательского права</institution></aff></aff-alternatives></contrib-group><pub-date pub-type="epub" iso-8601-date="2026-08-10"><day>10</day><month>08</month><year>2026</year></pub-date><issue>7</issue><fpage>201</fpage><lpage>205</lpage><history><date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="2026-05-22"><day>22</day><month>05</month><year>2026</year></date><date date-type="accepted" iso-8601-date="2026-08-03"><day>03</day><month>08</month><year>2026</year></date></history><self-uri content-type="pdf" xlink:href="doktrina-estoppel-by-deed-v-angliyskom-prave.pdf"/><abstract xml:lang="ru"><p>Статья посвящена исследованию доктрины estoppel by deed в английском праве. Рассматриваются понятие эстоппеля и место estoppel by deed в системе основных видов эстоппеля, применяемых в английской юрисдикции. Анализируется правовая природа документа особой формы (deed), его признаки и значение для возникновения рассматриваемой доктрины. Особое внимание уделяется структуре estoppel by deed, включающей два самостоятельных аспекта: невозможность отрицания содержания документа особой формы и возникновение имущественных прав на основании эстоппеля. Исследуются условия применения первого аспекта доктрины, связанного с запретом стороне deed оспаривать содержащиеся в нем ясные и недвусмысленные утверждения о фактах либо о фактах и праве. Отдельно рассматривается второй аспект доктрины, включающий категории interest by estoppel (имущественное право, основанное на эстоппеле) и «feeding the estoppel» («подпитывание эстоппеля»). На основе анализа доктрины и судебной практики обосновывается, что estoppel by deed обладает самостоятельной правовой природой и отличается от эстоппелей, основанных на доверии (reliance-based estoppels), поскольку его применение не требует доказывания доверия (reliance), ущерба (detriment) и недобросовестности (unconscionability). Делается вывод, что основное назначение estoppel by deed заключается в обеспечении устойчивости и определенности правоотношений, возникающих на основании документов особой формы (deed).</p></abstract><abstract xml:lang="en" abstract-type="summary"><p>The article is devoted to the study of the doctrine of estoppel by deed under English law. It examines the concept of estoppel and the place of estoppel by deed within the system of the principal types of estoppel recognized in English jurisprudence. The legal nature of a deed, its characteristics, and its significance for the emergence of the doctrine are analyzed. Particular attention is paid to the structure of estoppel by deed, which includes two distinct aspects: the prohibition against denying the contents of a deed and the creation of proprietary rights on the basis of estoppel. The article explores the requirements for the application of the first aspect of the doctrine, which prevents a party to a deed from disputing clear and unambiguous statements of fact or statements of mixed fact and law contained therein. Separate consideration is given to the second aspect of the doctrine, including the concepts of interest by estoppel and “feeding the estoppel”. Based on an analysis of legal doctrine and judicial practice, it is argued that estoppel by deed possesses an independent legal nature and differs from reliance-based estoppels, since its application does not require proof of reliance, detriment, and unconscionability. The article concludes that the principal purpose of estoppel by deed is to ensure stability and certainty in legal relationships arising from deeds.</p></abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>эстоппель</kwd><kwd>эстоппель на основании документа особой формы</kwd><kwd>документ особой формы</kwd><kwd>имущественное право</kwd><kwd>основанное на эстоппеле</kwd><kwd>подпитывание эстоппеля</kwd><kwd>estoppel</kwd><kwd>estoppel by deed</kwd><kwd>deed</kwd><kwd>interest by estoppel</kwd><kwd>feeding the estoppel</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>estoppel</kwd><kwd>estoppel by deed</kwd><kwd>deed</kwd><kwd>interest by estoppel</kwd><kwd>feeding the estoppel</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><back><ref-list><ref id="ref1"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">Barnes M. The Law of Estoppel. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref2"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">Black’s Law Dictionary. 9th ed. St. Paul: West Group, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref3"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">Chitty on Contracts. 32nd ed. Vol. 1. London: Sweet &amp;amp; Maxwell, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref4"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">Sir Edward Coke et al. The First Part of the Institutes of the Laws of England, Or, a Commentary upon Littleton: Not the Name of the Author Only, but of the Law Itself. Vol. II. 1st American, from the 19th London edition. Philadelphia, 1853. URL: https://archive.org/details/firstpartofinsti02coke/ page/352/mode/2up (дата обращения: 20.05.2026).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref5"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">Wilken S., Ghaly K. The Law of Waiver, Variation and Estoppel. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref6"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">Biddle v. Bond</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref7"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">6 B &amp;amp; S 225.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref8"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">Bowman v. Taylor</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref9"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">2 AD &amp;amp; E 279; 111 ER 108.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref10"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">Cuthbertson v. Irving</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref11"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">4 H &amp;amp; N 742.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref12"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">Davis v. Stone</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref13"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">2 EGLR 222.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref14"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">First National Bank Plc v. Thompson</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref15"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">1 All ER 144 CA.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref16"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">Greer v. Kettle</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref17"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">AC 156.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref18"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">Industrial Properties (Barton Hill) Ltd v. Associated Electrical Industries Ltd</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref19"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">1 QB 580.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref20"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">Mackley v. Nutting</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref21"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">2 KB 55.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref22"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">Taylors Fashions Ltd v. Liverpool Victoria Trustees Co Ltd</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref23"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">1 QB 133.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref24"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">Webb v. Austin</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref25"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">7 Man &amp;amp; G 701.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref26"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">Wiles v. Woodward</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref27"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="ru">1 Exch 557; 155 ER 244.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref28"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">Barnes M. The Law of Estoppel. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref29"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">Black’s Law Dictionary. 9th ed. St. Paul: West Group, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref30"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">Chitty on Contracts. 32nd ed. Vol. 1. London: Sweet &amp;amp; Maxwell, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref31"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">Sir Edward Coke et al. The First Part of the Institutes of the Laws of England, Or, a Commentary upon Littleton: Not the Name of the Author Only, but of the Law Itself. Vol. II. 1st American, from the 19th London edition. Philadelphia, 1853. URL: https://archive.org/details/firstpartofinsti02coke/ page/352/mode/2up (data obrashhenija: 20.05.2026).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref32"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">Wilken S., Ghaly K. The Law of Waiver, Variation and Estoppel. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref33"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">Biddle v. Bond</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref34"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">6 B &amp;amp; S 225.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref35"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">Bowman v. Taylor</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref36"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">2 AD &amp;amp; E 279; 111 ER 108.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref37"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">Cuthbertson v. Irving</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref38"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">4 H &amp;amp; N 742.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref39"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">Davis v. Stone</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref40"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">2 EGLR 222.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref41"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">First National Bank Plc v. Thompson</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref42"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">1 All ER 144 CA.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref43"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">Greer v. Kettle</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref44"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">AC 156.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref45"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">Industrial Properties (Barton Hill) Ltd v. Associated Electrical Industries Ltd</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref46"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">1 QB 580.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref47"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">Mackley v. Nutting</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref48"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">2 KB 55.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref49"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">Taylors Fashions Ltd v. Liverpool Victoria Trustees Co Ltd</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref50"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">1 QB 133.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref51"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">Webb v. Austin</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref52"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">7 Man &amp;amp; G 701.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref53"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">Wiles v. Woodward</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="ref54"><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xml:lang="en">1 Exch 557; 155 ER 244.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>
