LAWS1100 Study Guide - Final Guide: Estoppel, Specific Performance, Corporations Act 2001
Document Summary
See: lord denning in moorgate ltd v twitchings (1976): promissory estoppel will allow a promise to be enforced even though the promisee has not provided consideration for that promise equity; See: walton stores v maher and another (1988) Facts: mr & mrs maher owned commercial premises. For a 3 month period (at end of 1983), waltons effectively delayed finalising the formal (cid:272)o(cid:374)t(cid:396)a(cid:272)t/deed a(cid:374)d told thei(cid:396) oli(cid:272)ito(cid:396)s to (cid:862)go slo(cid:449)(cid:863), (cid:449)ithout letti(cid:374)g mahe(cid:396) k(cid:374)o(cid:449) of thei(cid:396) true intentions. In early 1984, maher commenced construction of the new building in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by waltons. Elements of promissory estoppel: some sort of legal relationship either exists or is anticipated between the parties, promisor makes a clear and unambiguous promise; Lecture 5: the promisee relies on the promise - by changing their circumstances, the promisee will suffer a material detriment/disadvantage if the promisor does not keep their promise;
