Promissory estoppel Flashcards
Hughes v Metropolitan Railway
Where a person has contractual rights against another but induces them to believe such rights will be held in abeyance for a particular time, the court will not allow that promise to be resiled from (see also Birmingham and District Land v London and North Western Railway)
High Trees House
L Denning (obiter): if (a) a promise was made (b) which was intended to be relied on (c) Equity would not permit the promisor to go back on his promise
Hughes and Foakes
Trietel argues that the principle in Hughes can be distinguished from Foakes because Hughes is about suspending a right, not extinguishing it. However this is not quite: the landlord did lose his right in the sense that it can permanently prevent its exercise
High Trees and Foakes
High Trees can be argued to sit outside Foakes b/c (a) estoppel only serves as a defence; (b) there must be some reliance on the promise; (c) the promisor must be able to withdraw the promise by giving notice; (d) High Trees falls under Equitable not common law jurisdiction
Hughes, Birmingham
There must be a clear promise, intended to affect legal relations between the parties (this may be implied
Jorden v Money
Only a representation of fact is sufficient for generating an estoppel
Ajayi v Biscoe
The promise must have been relied on
High Trees, Alan v El Nasr, The Post Chaser
Detriment is not required
Collier v Wright
The retraction after reliance in an inequitable manner (cf. Arden LJ: resiling from a promise to accept part payment will always be inequitable, but this undermines Foakes and Selectmove)
D & C Builders v Rees
There will be cases where resiling from one’s promise will not be inequitable
Tool Metal Manufacturing v Tungsten
The right holder may be able to rescind his concession by giving reasonable notice
Ajayi v Briscoe
Where the promisee has so altered his position as to make resumption of his duties impossible, the rights will be extinguished
Combe v Combe
Equity is a shield not a sword, it cannot be the sole cause of action; however, it can be used in conjunction with another cause (e.g. breach of contract) to defeat the defendant’s defence
General condition
It can only arise in the context of suspending or extinguishing a pre-existing right under contract (not followed in Aus or US)
