Promissory estoppel Flashcards
Hughes v Metropolitan Railway [1877]
failure to carry out repairs in time
Central London Property v High Trees House [1947]
Denning J. obiter ‘if landlord had claimed…’
Combe v Combe [1951]
‘shield not a sword’
Chappell v Nestlé [1960]
chocolate wrapper - a contracting party can stipulate for what consideration they choose
Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale Ltd [1991]
casino chips
Lampleigh v Brathwait [1615]
assumpsit, James I
Ward v Byham [1956]
child was ‘well looked after and happy’
Pao On v Lau Yiu [1980]
PC said i) performed the act at the promisor’s request; (ii) it was clearly understood (implied) at the time of the request that the claimant would be rewarded for the act; and (iii) the eventual promise is one which would have been enforceable if it had been made at the time of the act
Williams v Roffey Bros [1991]
Glidewell LJ ‘practical benefit’ in contract renegotiation
Re Selectmove [1995]
Peter Gibson LJ ‘To treat ‘practical benefit’ as consideration would leave Foakes v Beer without any application – a matter for the House of Lords or Parliament
Collier v Wright [2008]
Arden LJ - C’s ‘reliance’ is satisfied by making part-payment of his debt; that reliance makes it automatically ‘inequitable’ for W to resile from his promise. Not accepted by CoA in MWB
MWB v Rock Advertising [2017]
Lord Sumption comments on Roffey and ‘Foakes v Beers is ‘probably ripe for re-examination’
