Promissory Estoppel Flashcards
Which case introduced the modern doctrine of promissory estoppel?
A. Central London Property Trust v High Trees
B. Combe v Combe
C. Foakes v Beer
D. D & C Builders v Rees
A. Central London Property Trust v High Trees
Explanation: Denning J developed the doctrine in this case, allowing a promise to be binding without consideration, where it was relied upon.
Which of the following best describes the role of promissory estoppel?
A. It creates new enforceable obligations
B. It replaces the need for consideration in all contracts
C. It is a defensive doctrine preventing unfair retraction of promises
D. It allows a party to claim damages for breach of promise
C. It is a defensive doctrine preventing unfair retraction of promises
Explanation: It is an equitable doctrine acting as a “shield, not a sword”, preventing unjust enforcement of strict rights.
Promissory estoppel may be relied upon when:
A. There is an agreement in writing
B. A party makes a clear promise and the other relies on it to their detriment or changes their position
C. The promisor received consideration
D. A contract has been discharged
B. A party makes a clear promise and the other relies on it to their detriment or changes their position
Explanation: Key requirements include a clear promise, reliance, and inequity in going back on the promise.
A landlord tells a struggling tenant they can pay half rent during lockdown. The tenant pays half for six months. Can the landlord claim the arrears later?
A. Yes, always
B. No, because of the variation
C. No, if promissory estoppel applies
D. Yes, if the lease says rent is fixed
C. No, if promissory estoppel applies
Explanation: If the tenant relied on the landlord’s promise and it would be inequitable to go back, estoppel may stop recovery of arrears.
A promise was made to suspend rent, and the tenant changed their financial plans as a result. Which requirement of promissory estoppel does this most clearly satisfy?
A. Consideration
B. Clear promise
C. Change of position in reliance
D. Inequity
C. Change of position in reliance
Explanation: Estoppel requires that the promisee relied on the promise to change their position, even without detriment.
Which case confirmed that promissory estoppel is not a cause of action but a defence?
A. Hughes v Metropolitan Railway
B. Combe v Combe
C. Tool Metal v Tungsten
D. MWB v Rock
B. Combe v Combe
Explanation: In Combe, it was confirmed that estoppel cannot be used to sue someone for breach of promise.
What is the likely legal outcome if a debtor pays part of a debt after a promise to accept less, and then the creditor sues for the balance?
A. The debtor automatically wins due to partial payment
B. The creditor is estopped if there is reliance and inequity
C. The creditor can only sue if the agreement was written
D. The debtor can use economic duress as a defence
B. The creditor is estopped if there is reliance and inequity
Explanation: Estoppel can block strict enforcement if there was a promise, reliance, and unfairness in retracting it.
D & C Builders were pressured into accepting a lesser sum from Rees. Why did the court refuse to allow Rees to rely on promissory estoppel?
A. The debt had been fully paid
B. There was no written agreement
C. There was economic duress and bad faith
D. The builders were not in contract
C. There was economic duress and bad faith
Explanation: Rees exploited the builders’ financial need, so the court found it inequitable for her to rely on estoppel.
In Tool Metal v Tungsten, how did the court describe the effect of promissory estoppel?
A. It extinguishes legal rights permanently
B. It suspends legal rights, which may later resume
C. It replaces all need for consideration
D. It applies even without reliance
B. It suspends legal rights, which may later resume
Explanation: The court held that estoppel generally suspends rights, which can be revived with reasonable notice.
What must a promise be in order for promissory estoppel to apply?
A. Express and made in writing
B. Implied by statute
C. Clear and unequivocal
D. Considered unfair by both parties
C. Clear and unequivocal
Explanation: The promise must clearly indicate that strict legal rights will not be enforced.
Which of the following is true about the relationship between promissory estoppel and consideration?
A. Estoppel replaces consideration in contract formation
B. Estoppel enforces promises even when they’re completely gratuitous
C. Estoppel allows promises to be binding without consideration, but only as a defence
D. Estoppel can only be used where consideration has been given
C. Estoppel allows promises to be binding without consideration, but only as a defence
Explanation: Estoppel prevents enforcement of rights where there is reliance, despite a lack of consideration.
A landlord promises to freeze rent and later claims arrears. The tenant had relied on the promise but there was no written agreement. Can estoppel apply?
A. No, because the promise was not written
B. Yes, if it was express and clearly relied upon
C. No, because rent is a fixed legal obligation
D. Yes, if consideration was provided
B. Yes, if it was express and clearly relied upon
Explanation: Estoppel can apply based on verbal promises if they are clear and there’s reliance.
