• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Law of Contract - Promissory Estoppel

Extracts from this document...


LAW OF CONTRACT - PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL Kajai, a caf� proprietor hired a dish washing machine from Long for use in the caf� at a rental of $10 per week. In January 1991, the local council began extensive roadworks outside the caf� which made it difficult for people to get to the caf� and Kajai's business was seriously affected. At Kajai's request Long agreed to reduce the rental to $1 per week for 3 months. By the end of the 3 months, the roadworks had been completed but Kajai's caf� now needed redecorating because of all the dust created by the roadwork. Kajai told Long that he was on the verge of bankruptcy and begged him to leave the rental for the dish washing at $1 per week for a further 6 months. Reluctantly, Long agreed. In June a fire occurred at a rival caf� across the road from Kajai's and it was forced to close, so that Kajai now enjoys greatly increased business and is making handsome profits. Long on the other hand, is very short of money and needs every penny he can get. Kajai insists that Long is still only entitled to $1 per week rental. Advise Long. ANSWER In advising Long, one must firstly, consider whether there is an existence of a contract, which is an agreement between two parties giving rise to rights and liabilities. ...read more.


The law says that the promise must be unequivocal and clear (Woodhouse v Israel Cocoa v Nigerian Produce Marketing). On the facts given, Long did make a promise to Kajai on the $1 rental after Kajai requested it and one may say that it is made unequivocally, as long as Long's promise was made due to the conditions that Kajai suffered loss of business for the first three months and because of this he was on the verge of bankruptcy later. This shows the seriousness of intention when the promise was made. It is because of Long's promise that Kajai paid $1 per week instead of $10. Thus a clear and unequivocal promise have been made by Long. In order for the defence to be in favour of Kajai, there has to be a contractual or any other legal relationship as required by Ajayi v Briscoe and the case of Durham Fancy Goods v Michael Jackson Fancy Goods where Lord Donaldson stated that an existing contractual relationship was not necessary providing there was a pre existing legal relationship which could give rise to rights and liabilities. Applying this to the facts of the question, it seems that this requirement is satisfied, as Kajai and Long already have a business relationship with regards to the rental of the washing machine and due to this pre existing contractual relationship there was some reliance on the part of Kajai for Long's promise. ...read more.


Considering the duration between March to June, if Kajai actually came to equity with clean hands its submitted that this doctrine is extinctive too,which will disable Long to claim for the $9 per week. Finally, for the duration of Jun to September, it can be established from the facts that Kajai is now in a better position as he is making handsome profits due to the closing down of a rival's business. Therefore, applying the case of Ajayi v Briscoe and Tool Manufacturing v Tungsten Electric, Long's rights is only suspended. This would allow him to resume the full payment of $10 per week from June onwards upon giving Kajai reasonable notice that he intends to resume his strict rights, though the 6 months period has not ended. This is only fair and just, since the doctrine itself is a creature of equity. Furthermore, Long now is in financial difficulties and requires finance. In conclusion, since there is a conflict between common law's part payment rule and the equitable principle of promissory estoppel, Long is advised that from the period of January to June his rights to claim the balance $9 is extinguised, as equity prevails over the common law when a conflict arises. This would only be possible if promissory estoppel is made out. However, the resumption of full payment from June onwards will be available to Long after giving reasonable notice. ?? ?? ?? ?? 1 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Law of Contract section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Law of Contract essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    "The requirement of consideration is an unnecessary complication in the formation of contracts."

    4 star(s)

    operate upon representation or promises as to future conduct, including promises as to legal relations. Estoppels are relevant to the issue at hand due to the fact that estoppels, especially promissory estoppels had watered down much of the strict requirements of consideration in simple contracts.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Contract Law - Offer And Acceptance

    3 star(s)

    JM Leigh's executors (Morgan) refused to pay, arguing that they were not liable as the debts were contracted and incurred after the death of JM Leigh and not in his lifetime. Judgment was given for the plaintiffs, Bradbury. Death Of Offeree * Can not be accepted after the offeree's death15 & 16 15Warrington LJ said that ' ...

  1. Four ways in which a contract may be discharged.

    Clearly the potential profits on a project such as a film are extremely difficult to predict; it could be a huge success or sink without a trace. Consequently, Anglia sought instead to claim back the money they had spent on making the film.

  2. Contract Law

    This inquiry can at most, only communicate interest but not acceptance nor rejection of an offer (Stevenson Jaques v McLean (1880)). Notification to the Offeror of the Fact of Acceptance The offeree must communicate acceptance of the offer to the offeror and agreement is not complete until such communication is

  1. Undue influence in the case of Barclays Bank v. O''Brian [1994] Lord Browne-Wilkinson was ...

    Court of Appeal in: Royal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2) [1998] REMEDIES The remedy in cases of undue influence is rescission. Damages are not available, but see below. RESCISSION Where rescission is ordered, the whole transaction will be set aside.

  2. Definitions of Actus reus, mens rea & strict liability

    he has created, there arises a duty to act reasonably to avert that danger, I.E R v Miller 1983 State of Affairs (absolute liability offences)

  1. Aspects of the law affecting construction projects.

    The landowner employed Evans to dig a trench which resulted in the cable being damaged. It was held that Evans was not liable as they were not aware of the cable and were not to blame for allowing it to be damaged by the excavator.

  2. Aspects of Contract and Business Law Case Studies

    Consideration might be executory (future) or executed (present). Consideration cannot be from the past and it must be sufficient, have economic value and must move from the promisee. In the contract above the consideration has economic value to both parties; money being the case in Temuulen industrials and the 2 different types of bricks in Amersham & Wycombe limited?s.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work