Estoppel PDF

Preview

Summary

Notes...

Description

ESTOPPEL' ' • •

‘Estop’'one'party'from'denying'the'truth'of,'or'acting'inconsistently'with,'an' assumption'which'the'other'has'been'encouraged'to'adopt' Representor'and'relying'party'

' Types&of&Estoppel& Estoppel'by'record'(inc'res'judicata,'issue'estoppel)' ' Estoppel'by'conduct:' At&common&law& • inc'estoppel'by'convention,'estoppel'by'representation' • limited'to'assumptions'as'to'present'fact'(Jorden'v'Money)' o Jorden'v'Money& P'owed'sum,'gave'bond'to'the'creditor,'which'D'inherited.'D'said'they'would' never'enforce,'so'P'spent'money'on'a'wedding.'P'sought'debt'to'be' abandoned.'Court'said'there'couldn’t'be'estoppel'as'D’s'representation'was' one'of'intention'not'of'fact.' In&equity&& • proprietary'estoppel'(inc'estoppel'by'encouragement'and'estoppel'by'acquiescence)' • promissory'estoppel' • Can'be'representations'as'to'the'future'(Riches'v'Hogben)'' o Riches'v'Hogben' Son'agreed'to'emigrate'as'mother'said'she'would'put'house'in'his'name.' Mother'put'house'in'her'name,'son'moved'and'brought'action'to'get'house' in'his'name.'Succeeded'as'three'elements'satisfied.' ' Equitable&Estoppel& & ELEMENTS& • Representation:&A'encourages'B'to'adopt'an'assumption'(Legione'v'Hateley)& • Detrimental&Reliance:&B'acts'on'that'belief,'such'that'B'would'be'worse'off'if'A' departed'from'that'assumption'(detrimental'reliance)'(Je'Maintiendrai'v'Quaglia;' Ashton'v'Pratt).'Party'raising'estoppel'must'always'prove'detrimental'reliance'(Sidhu' v'Van'Dyke)'' • Unconscionability:&Unconscionable'for'A'to'depart'from'assumption,'knowing'that' plaintiff'would'suffer'a'detriment'(Austotel'v'Franklins)' ' REMEDY&& • Enforcing'the'promise'or'at'least'its'value'(sidhu'v'van'dyke)' THE'REMEDY'IS'NO'LONGER'THE'MINIMUM'EQUITY' • The'recovery'will'be'limited'to'the'extent'of'B’s'reliance.' • NO&DAMAGES&IN&ESTOPPEL' & '

Promissory'Estoppel' ' Je'Maintiendrai'v'Quaglia& • Landlord'made'a'representation'to'tenants'that'they'can'have'a'discount'for'18' months.& • Landlord'tried'to'claim'full'amount'when'they'left.& • Promissory'estoppel'prevented'landlord'from'denying'his'promise,'can’t'claim'full' amount' • Promissory'estoppel'could'only'arise'if'the'Relying'Party'has'changed'his'position'on' the'faith'of'the'promise,'and'would'suffer'a'detriment'if'the'Representor'was' allowed'to'depart'from'his'representation/enforce'his'previous'contractual'rights.' Legione'v'Hateley& • • • • • •

Contracts'for'sale'of'land.' Deadline'dead'set,'purchaser’s'solicitors'called'and'asked'to'have'another'week.' Secretary'for'the'vendor’s'solicitors'said'it'should'be'ok'but'need'to'get'instructions.' Purchaser'took'that'as'an'extension,'tried'to'make'the'purchase'after'the'deadline.' Rejected'by'vendor,'contract'has'been'withdrawn.' No'estoppel'

' Sidhu'v'Van'Dyke' • Van'Dyke’s'paid'rent'to'Sidhu’s.'Mr'Sidhu'and'Mrs'VD'started'physical'relationship.' Promised'to'transfer'cottage'to'her.'Period'of'8'years,'Mrs'VD'lost'opportunity'to' earn'wages'thinking'she'was'getting'cottage.'Relationship'ended.'Estoppel'satisfied,' VD'proved'detriment.'Sidhu'payed'equitable'compensation'to'value'of'cottage.' ' Ashton'v'Pratt' • Ashton'was'Pratt’s'mistress.'Pratt'promised'trust'to'Ashton,'in'which'she'promised' to'leave'the'escort'business.'Pratt'died'and'Ashton'sued'his'estate.' ' Austotel'v'Franklins' • A'in'negotiations'to'lease'property'to'F.'F'refused'to'finalise.'A'sought'to'withdraw.' Found'it'was'not'unconscionable'for'them'to'do'so'as'F'deliberately'refused'to' commit'themselves.'

' PRIVITY' • • • '

Contracts'benefiting'a'third'party' Contracts'burdening'a'third'party' Transfer'of'contractual'rights'

A' '

'

B'

'

C''

' '

' •

When'contract'with'A'and'B,'C'cannot'enforce'contract'because'doctrine'of'privity' (Coulls'v'Bagot's;'Wilson'v'Darling'Island)'

' Coulls'v'Bagot’s' • • • •

Mr'Coulls'made'contract'with'Bagot’s'(and'O’Niell'Construction)'for'them'to'quarry' property'in'return'for'royalties.'' Mrs'Coulls'signed'but'was'not'technically'party'to'contract.' Mr'Coulls'passed'away.'Could'Mrs'Coulls'be'payed'the'royalties?' HC'said'no'contactual'obligation'as'she'was'not'party'to'the'contract,'no'promise'to' pay'royalty'to'the'wife'(which'husband'had'authorised,'contract'made'between' husband'and'company)'

Wilson'v'Darling'Island' • DI'was'not'a'party'to'the'contract'evidenced'by'the'bill'of'lading,'and'therefore'it' could'neither'sue'nor'be'sued'' Trident'v'McNiece' • • • • • •

An'exception'to'the'privity'rule'should'be'recognized'in'the'case'of'insurance' contracts.& McNiece'was'contractor'for'construction'work'at'a'plant'owned'by'Blue'Circle.& Blue'Circle'entered'into'contract'of'insurance'with'Trident& Injured'crane'driver'sued'McNiece'for'damages,'McNiece'then'tried'to'get'money' from'Trident.& Trident'argued'that'McNiece'could'not'sue'as'they'were'not'party'to'the'contract' between'Blue'Circle'and'Trident.'& McNiece'could'enforce'policy'regardless'of'DoP.&

GETTING&AROUND&THE&DOCTRINE&OF&PRIVITY& ' Joint'promisee:' • C'can'argue'that'they'are'actually'a'party'to'the'contract'as'a'joint'promisee'(Coulls'v' Bagot’s)'

Agency'Arrangements:' If'B'contracts'with'A,'with'A'acting'as'an'agent'for'C,'then'the'contract'is'really' between'B'and'C.' A'(the'agent)'must'have'authority'to'contract'on'behalf'of'C'(the'principal).' Authority'may'be'expressed'or'implied.'

• • •

Harris'v'Burrell'&'Family' • recognising'that'in'order'for'there'to'be'an'agent,'they'must'have'authority'that'is' actual'or'ostensible,'and'that'it'must'be'made'clear'that'they'are'acting'as'an'agent.'' Enforcement'by'the'promisee:' •

Promisee'(A)'may'obtain'order'for'specific'performance'against'promisor'(B)'in' favour'of'third'party'(C).'

Beswick'v'Beswick' •

• • •

Peter'Beswick'agreed'to'sell'coal'business'to'nephew'providing'that'nephew'pay' certain'sum'to'him'as'long'as'he'lived,'and'then'Mrs'Beswick'5'pounds'per'week' after'he'died.' Found'that'Mrs'Beswick'could'not'sue'nephew'as'she'was'not'party'to'the'contract.' However,'found'that'executors'of'wills'can'sue'for'specific'performance'of'promises' made'in'contract'with'the'deceased.' But'any'damages'for'failure'to'confer'benefit'must'reflect'promisee’s'loss,'not'third' party’s'(Coulls'v'Bagot’s).'

Inferring'a'trust:' • A'trust'is'an'arrangement'where'the'owner'of'property'gives'it'to'a'second'party' (a'trustee)'to'manage'on'behalf'of'a'third'party'(a'beneficiary).' • Promisee'may'hold'the'benefit'of'a'contractual'promise'on'trust'for'a'third'party' • Express'trust'–'done'as'a'deed' • Other'trusts'(constructive,'resulting)'–'knows'there'is'a'trust'even'though'there' is'not'an'agreement'that'states.' A'(trustee)''

B'

' '

'

Trus

' & '

'

'

C'(Beneficiary)''

Promisor'(trustor'(B))'owns'property,'transferred'property'to'promisee'(trustee'(A))' to'be'held'until'it'gets'to'beneficiary'(C).'

• '...