Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Estoppel forms part of the rules of equity, which were originally administered in the Chancery courts. Estoppel in English law is a doctrine that may be used in certain situations to prevent a person from relying upon certain rights, or upon a set of facts (e.g. words said or actions performed) which is different from an earlier set of facts.
In general, estoppel is "a shield not a sword"—it cannot be used as the basis of an action on its own. [27] It also does not extinguish rights. In High Trees the plaintiff company was able to restore payment of full rent from early 1945, and could have restored the full rent at any time after the initial promise was made provided a suitable ...
Combe v Combe [1951] 2 KB 215 is a famous English contract law case on promissory estoppel. An ex-wife tried to take advantage of the principle that had been reintroduced in the High Trees case to enforce her husband's promise to give her maintenance. The Court held that promissory estoppel could not be applied.
Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd [1947] KB 130, commonly called High Trees, is a leading opinion in the High Court relating to contract law.It reaffirmed and extended the doctrine of promissory estoppel in the contract law of England and Wales.
Combe v Combe (1952), elaborating stance on promissory estoppel, calling it a "shield", not a "sword". Hoenig v Isaacs [1952] EWCA Civ 6 i; Frederick E Rose (London) Ltd v William H Pim Junior & Co Ltd [1953] 2 QB 450, denying rectification for common mistake about the quality of horebeans under a contract of sale
Collateral estoppel (CE), known in modern terminology as issue preclusion, is a common law estoppel doctrine that prevents a person from relitigating an issue. One summary is that, "once a court has decided an issue of fact or law necessary to its judgment, that decision ... preclude[s] relitigation of the issue in a suit on a different cause of action involving a party to the first case". [1]
Estoppel, consideration, pre-contractual negotiations Waltons Stores (Interstate) Ltd v Maher , [ 1 ] is a leading case in Australian contract law . The Australian High Court decided that estoppel , in certain circumstances, could be a cause of action.
The doctrine of direct estoppel prevents a party to litigation from relitigating an issue that was decided against that party. [1] Direct estoppel and collateral estoppel are part of the larger doctrine of issue preclusion. [2] Issue preclusion means that a party cannot litigate the same issue in a subsequent action. [3]