“In Thorner –v- Major‚ the House of Lords confirmed that a claimant seeking to establish a proprietary estoppel must prove three things: (1) that the defendant’s assurances or conduct in relation to identified property were sufficiently clear and unambiguous in all the circumstances‚ (2) to lead the claimant reasonably to rely on those assurances or conduct; (3) by acting significantly to his detriment‚ so that it would be unconscionable for the defendant to deny him any remedy.” (Per Hayton
Premium Law Contract Common law
Rice 12. Lloyds Bank v Carrick 13. Birmingham Midshires Mortgage Services Ltd v Sabherwal 14. City of London Building Society V Flegg Statutes : 1. LRA 1925 S. 70(1)(g) ‘’Critically assess the contribution that the equitable doctrine of proprietary estoppels makes to modern land law.’’ During the Norman conquest in 1066‚ William the Conqueror instead of rewarding his followers with money and titles‚ he in-turn awarded them titles to lands and‚ in turn depleting the native-landholders
Premium Property Common law Real property
Proprietary estoppel is a powerful equitable legal concept; used as both a ‘sword’ and a ‘shield’ which distinguishes it from other equitable concepts. To have a successful claim within proprietary estoppel three basic requirements must be fulfilled‚ as quoted by Ying Khai Liew: “B induces A to assume‚ through a promise‚ assurance or acquiescence in A’s mistaken belief‚ that B will cede an interest in property he or she owns to A‚ and A detrimentally relies on the assumption” This essay will
Premium Abraham Lincoln American Civil War United States
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
Premium Property Common law Property law
contract law The many doctrines of promissory estoppel If one concept in the early part of the contract law syllabus is difficult for the law student to digest‚ it is promissory estoppel‚ usually learned alongside the doctrine of consideration. This article tackles this tricky topic by dissecting promissory estoppel. by Adam Kramer‚ Lecturer in Law‚ University of Durham Promises are special in our society because there is a societal or moral convention that allows a promisor to be treated as
Premium Common law Contract Contract law
Promissory Estoppel Promissory Estoppel Defined Sometimes an agreement without consideration will be enforced. This happens when a promise which foreseeably induces promisee to act or forebear becomes binding because injustice can only be avoided by enforcement of the promise. Promise A promise is an assurance‚ in whatever form or expression that a thing will or will not be done. Actual Reliance The promisee must actually and justifiably rely on the promise by the other.
Premium Contract law Contract Promise
by estopped * Estoppel: situation where a person is precluded from saying something – namely the denial that a promise has been made. Protects person from the injurious consequence of reliance. * For example : creditor agrees to accept lesser sum in discharge of a greater sum‚ cant reclaim full payment refer to D & C Builders Ltd v Rees Estoppel Generally: * Different forms of estoppel: common law estoppel‚ estoppel in pais‚ estoppel by representation estoppel by convention…promissory
Premium Contract
Consideration is an essential element in the formation of a contract. Consideration may be a promise to carry out an action or a promise to refrain from carrying out an act that one is legally entitled to perform. Consideration may be defined in many ways‚ the following definition was obtained from Currie v Misa (1975) LR Exch 153. In this case‚ Lush J said: “A valuable consideration in the sense of the law may consist either in some right‚ interest‚ profit or benefit accruing to one party‚ or
Premium Contract law Contract Law
1963 ANTONIO C. GOQUIOLAY‚ ET AL.‚ plaintiffs-appellants‚ vs. WASHINGTON Z. SYCIP‚ ET AL.‚ defendants-appellees. Facts: On May 29‚ 1940‚ Tan Sin An and Antonio C. Goquiolay formed a commercial partnership in Davao‚ having capital contribution of 40% and 60%‚ respectively. The business of the partnership is to engage in the buying‚ resale and lease of real estates for subdivision. Among the conditions agreed upon in the partnership agreement that are material in this case are: (1) Tan
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Court Supreme court
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
Premium Contract Contractual term Sale of Goods Act 1979