Preview

Doctrine of Promissory Estoppel.

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1109 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Doctrine of Promissory Estoppel.
To begin with, the case as regards Richard and Ernie is related to the Doctrine of Promissory Estoppel, which is derived from Equity. According to this doctrine, if one party to the contract (promisor) makes a promise which the other party to the contract (promisee) acts upon, the promisor is estopped from going back on his promise, even though the promise did not provide any consideration.

Theoretically, by this concept, Ernie should be estopped from asking Richard for the remaining balance of ₤140. The main reason is that Ernie promised to accept a smaller sum of ₤160 from Richard in full settlement, intending Richard to rely on that promise, so he cannot go back to the original promise of ₤300 as a full payment. Hereafter, a number of cases concerning this Doctrine shall be discussed as a reference in support of the case of Richard and Ernie.

One of the most important cases relevant to the case of Richard and Ernie is Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd [1947] KB 130, from which the Doctrine of Promissory Estoppel originated. The Court held that part of money as requested by the plaintiff, could be recovered. According to Lord Denning, if the plaintiff asked to claim the whole sum of money, he would fail to recover the money even though the defendant did not provide any consideration. It is because the plaintiff 's contractual right for the whole sum of rent in 1940-5 was destroyed by agreeing to accept the reduced rent in the wartime. By the Doctrine of Promissory Estoppel, the plaintiff was estopped from getting the full rent in wartime, so he could only recover the rent after wartime. Referring to this case, it shows that in the case of Ernie and Richard, Ernie has no contractual rights to claim the remaining money.

There is another similar case, which is Tool Metal Manufacturing Co. Ltd v Tungsten Electric Co. Ltd [1955] 1 WLR 761 (HL). There was a term in the contract that the defendant had to pay compensation to the plaintiff if he



Bibliography: Books - Poole J., (2004), Casebook on Contract Law, 6th edition, Oxford, Hampshire. - Richards P., (2004), Law of Contract, 6th edition, Pearson, Dorchester. - Elliott C. and Quinn F., (2003), Contract Law, 4th edition, Pearson, Dorchester. (1877) 2 App Cas 439 (HL) Tool Metal Manufacturing Co

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    The Plaintiff, Stambovsky, sued to have the contract canceled. The trial court ruled in favor of Ackley.…

    • 692 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Formation of Contract

    • 715 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Under the assumption that Edwina has paid for the property the House of Lords ruled on a similar case of Sharp v Thomson saying that “a person who has made delivery of a conveyance and accepted…

    • 715 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Best Essays

    Aitken, L, 'Unforgiven: Some thoughts on Farah Constructions Pty Ltd v Say-Dee Pty Ltd ' (2007) 29 Australian Bar Review 195…

    • 3483 Words
    • 14 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Good Essays

    Business Law Module 6

    • 1803 Words
    • 5 Pages

    8. Sears, Roebuck and Co promised to give Forrer permanent employment, so he sold his farm at a loss to take the job. But shortly after beginning work, he was discharged by Sears who claimed the contract could be terminated at will. Forrer claimed that the promissory estoppel prevented Sears form terminating the contract. Under promissory estoppel a promisor may be prevented from asserting that their promise is unenforceable because the promise gave no consideration for the promise. This is applicable when the promisor makes a promise that lacks consideration, and intends or should reasonably expect that the promise will rely on the promise and in fact does, and that the enforcement of the promise is the only way to avoid injustice. In this case, promissory estoppel did not prevent Sears from terminating the contract. Generally speaking, a contract for permanent employment that provides no additional considerations (such as something benefitting the employer) for employment amounts to just a general hiring that is terminable at the will of either party. The promise was fulfilled once the relationship between Forrer and Sears was established, and no additional benefit to Sears was provided.…

    • 1803 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The case is refer to Riverside Property Investments Ltd. v Blackhawk Automotive [2004].The landlord, Riverside, claimed £87,500 for replacement of the roof of a light industrial unit, plus £36,200 for fees and costs incurred with the works from the tenant, Blackhawk. The works had been done by the landlord following the surrender of the lease shortly before it would have expired in September 2002. The claim had originally involved many heads, most of which had been compromised or dropped by agreement, but the main issue remained a matter of dispute despite attempts at settlement and mediation.…

    • 657 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Proprietary Estoppel

    • 2557 Words
    • 11 Pages

    (Per Hayton and Mitchell: ‘Commentary and cases on the law of Trust and Equitable Remedies’, 13th edition, Sweet and Maxwell, page 78)…

    • 2557 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Corporate Law Case Study

    • 1871 Words
    • 8 Pages

    [ 8 ]. Pioneer Concrete Services Ltd v Yelnah Pty Ltd (1986) 5 NSWLR 254…

    • 1871 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Best Essays

    Proprietary estoppel protects a person who has a non contractual agreement over land but they have suffered a detriment due to them acting upon a reliance based on an assurance made by the claimant. There has been much discussion in recent case law and academic commentaries as to the elements which make up the nature of proprietary estoppel. Unconscionaibility is a major point for discussion in deciding whether it should be treated as a separate element or if it is linked into the three main elements. This essay will consider and discuss the nature of proprietary estoppel and the two views on unconscionaibility; whether there will always be unconscionaibility if there has been a non-performance of an assurance causing the claimant to suffer a detriment based on the assurance which they relied on or if unconscionaibility should be proven as a separate element in each case.…

    • 2381 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Good Essays

    Business Law

    • 1322 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Whether or not the owner of the building can do this, we will look at a principle called Promissory Estopple. Promissory Estopple refers to when a party is stopped from going back on his promise if that promise has been acted upon by the party whom the promise was made to. This is binding to the promising party so as to prevent the promisee from suffering any form of injustice.…

    • 1322 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Common Law

    • 1178 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Promissory estoppel is relevant to the dispute between Max and Joanna because promissory estoppel is a “legal principle that prevents a person who made a promise from reengaging…

    • 1178 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Boone v Eyre (1779) According to the principle in the case, where a promisor has substantially performed his obligations under a contract, he can claim the agreed payment, less the amount necessary to make good the defect.…

    • 2108 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Facts:The Defendant on the 29th of May 1879, agreed to grant and the Plaintiff to accept a lease of a mill for seven years at the rent of 30s. a year for each loom run, the Plaintiff not to run less than 540 looms. The lease to contain such stipulations as were inserted in a certain lease of-the 1st of May, which was a lease at a fixed rent made payable in advance, and contained a stipulation that there should at all times be payable in advance on demand one whole year’s rent in a addition to the proportion, if any, of the yearly rent due and unpaid for the period previous to such demand. The Plaintiff was let into possession and paid rent quarterly, not in advance, down to the 1st of January, 1882, inclusive, having run in 1881 560 looms. In March, 1882, the Defendant demanded payment of £1000 14s. 840 as one whole year’s rent for 560 looms at 30s., and £165 as the proportionate part of the rent from the 1st of January last), and put in a. distress. The Plaintiff thereupon commenced his action for damages for illegal distress, for an in- and for specific performance, and moved for an injunction. Fry, J., granted the injunction on the terms of the Plaintiff paying the into Court. The Plaintiff appealed.…

    • 1760 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Best Essays

    Routley, Patrick, “Tenancies and Estoppel- After Bruton v London & Quadrant Housing Trust”, Modern Law Review Limited (2000)…

    • 2076 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Based on previous judgments such as Hughes v Metropolitan Railway Co, Denning J held that the full rent was payable from the time that the flats became fully occupied in mid-1945. However, he continued in an obiter statement that if Central London had tried to claim for the full rent from 1940 onwards, they would not have been able to. This was reasoned on the basis that if a party leads another party to believe that he will not enforce his strict legal rights, then the Courts will prevent him from doing so at a later stage. This obiter remark was not actually a binding precedent, yet it essentially created the doctrine of promissory…

    • 291 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    “A common mistake, even on a most fundamental matter, does not make a contract void at law; but it makes it voidable in equity.”…

    • 1271 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays