Promissory Estoppel

Question 1

How did Lord Neuberger describe estoppel?

Answer 1

As the legal formalisation that one should not mislead others to their detriment.

Question 2

What foundational principle did Lord Cairns set in Hughes v Metropolitan Railway Co. (1877)?

Answer 2

That negotiations or actions leading a party to believe their strict contractual rights will not be enforced can prevent those rights’ enforcement if inequitable.

Question 3

Which case advanced the doctrine of estoppel significantly?(1947)

Answer 3

Central London Property Ltd v High Trees House Ltd [1947], evolving the doctrine for modern needs.

Question 4

What are the requirements of Promissory Estoppel?

Answer 4

Clear and unambiguous representation, reliance on the representation often involving detriment, and it being inequitable to allow the promisor to renege on the promise.

Question 5

Can promissory estoppel extinguish rights?

Answer 5

Usually, it suspends rights, but in certain cases, like Collier v P & MJ Wright (Holdings) Ltd [2007], it can extinguish rights if equitable.

Question 6

How is promissory estoppel typically used in legal contexts?

Answer 6

As a defense (“shield”) rather than to create a new cause of action (“sword”), as seen in Combe v Combe [1951].

Question 7

What are the different types of estoppel?

Answer 7

Besides promissory estoppel, there are estoppel by representation and proprietary estoppel, each addressing fairness and reliance in various legal contexts.