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

Promissory estoppel is a necessary supplement to the doctrine of consideration, because it enables courts to enforce promises that have been relied upon even though the promise was not part of an exchange. Discuss.

Extracts from this document...


Contract Law Mark: 68% Q2. 'Promissory estoppel is a necessary supplement to the doctrine of consideration, because it enables courts to enforce promises that have been relied upon even though the promise was not part of an exchange.' Discuss. Denning LJ's profession: "the doctrine of consideration is too firmly fixed to be overthrown by a side-wind" indicates that it is the cardinal badge of enforceability in the formulation and variation of contracts in English common law. However, the orthodox Stilk v Myrik1 interpretation of the doctrine is particularly rigid. Its application can sometimes manifest inequity. Promissory estoppel can be viewed as supplementary to consideration as it remedies inequity by allowing promises that have been relied upon to be enforced without consideration. However, it can hardly be considered a supplement that is necessary. In actuality, the role of estoppel is a limited one that does not guarantee the absolute enforcement of all promises unsupported by consideration that have been relied upon. Firstly, certain conditions must be fulfilled for the estoppel to be applied. Secondly, for promissory estoppel to coexist with consideration, estoppel cannot be used offensively. Also, there are instances where the application of estoppel has led to irreconcilability with binding laws of consideration. Contrary to its supplementary nature, instances like these exemplify how estoppel can possibly contradict the doctrine of consideration altogether. ...read more.


3. The promisee must have relied on the promise or representation7. It was held that in Hayes v. Plantations Steel Co8, Plantations' promise to take care of Hayes post-retirement did not induce reliance by Hayes because he had decided to retire before any promise that he would receive a pension was made. The promise did not induce Hayes action or forbearance. Thus, without reliance, estoppel cannot apply despite the inequity caused by a sudden cease of pension after 3 years of payment. 4. It must be inequitable for the promisor to go back upon his promise. In D & C Builders v Rees9, the promisee was proven to have extracted the promise to accept a reduced sum by duress and because there was decided to be "no inequity in resiling". This case also highlights that estoppel can only enforce unsupported promises not part of the exchange only if they were made in good faith and were not fraudulent or extorted under duress. This good faith criterion can be perceived as another limiting factor in enforcing these promises. Additionally, the fact that promissory estoppel cannot be used offensively reiterates its rangebound capacity in enforcing such promises. It can only function defensively to prevent the promisor from enforcing his original rights relinquished. This is demonstrated in Combe v Combe10 where Denning LJ held that estoppel could not be create a cause of action where was none. ...read more.


App. 128, 506 N.W.2d 556 (1993) 7 As Goff J explained in The Post Chaser [1982]: "it is not necessary to show detriment... it would be open to the Court, in any particular case, to infer from the circumstances of the case that the representee must have conducted his affairs in such a way that it would be inequitable for the representor to enforce his rights, or to do so without reasonable notice" 8 438 A.2d 1091, 1094 (R.I. 1982) 9 [1965] 2 QB 617 10 [1951] 2 KB 215 11 [2007] EWCA Civ 1329 12 [1884] 9 App Cas 605 13 Referenced also in D & C Builders and Couldery v Bartrum 14 Russell LJ : 'in the late twentieth century I do not believe that the rigid approach to the concept of consideration to be found in Stilk v. Myrick is either necessary or desirable. Consideration there must still be but, in my judgment, the courts nowadays should be more ready to find its existence so as to reflect the intention of the parties to the contract where the bargaining powers are not unequal and where the finding of consideration reflects the intention of the parties.' 15 [1991] 1 QB 1, 18 16 See Adam Opel GmbH v Mitras Automotive (UK) Ltd and Simon Container Machinery Ltd v Emba Machinery AB 17 Ward v. Byham [1956] 1 WLR 496 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Contract Law 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 University Degree Contract Law essays

  1. What is the doctrine of consideration? Explain its relationship to the equitable doctrine of ...

    Forbearance can however amount to consideration, such as offering someone £100 not to knock down a fence, whilst acts which are illegal or so immoral that they are against established public policy, such as prostitution, cannot serve as consideration for enforceable contracts.

  2. Valley Homes v. Ace Minerals Corp.

    Consideration does not have to be fair but must be specific and legal. If there is no consideration for a promise, it is not a contract. This is called a gratuitous promise and such an agreement will not be enforced by the courts.

  1. "The rigid application of the Rule in Pinnel's Case has frequently caused hardship. ...

    As well as a clear promise, the promisor must have stated that he will not enforce his strict legal rights. Thus making the promise legitimate and binding in nature. Another requirement is that there must be clear identification of a contractual of legal relationship.

  2. The question raises the following legal issues; consideration, variation of contract, promissory estoppels and ...

    cases where the promissee cannot resume his position as stated in Emmanuel Ayodeji Ajay V RT Briscoe (Nigeria) Ltd. [1964]16. It is clear from High Trees, RT Briscoe and Tool Metal Cases that to invoke promissory estoppels, the promissee must have either acted on the promise of the promiser or at least altered his position in relevance on the promise.

  1. "Intention to create legal relations could be used to replace the doctrine of consideration. ...

    In the English Common law system, a promise is not legally binding as part of a contract except if it is made in a deed or supported by some consideration. 18 Sir Guenter Treitel Q.C., describes the purpose of consideration as, "...to put some legal limits on the enforceability of

  2. What is the Doctrine of Consideration? Explain its relationship to theEquitable Doctrine of Promissory ...

    His arguments are controversial and other scholars have rejected his theory on the grounds it does not show the circumstances in which the courts will find what he terms as "a good reason." As it stands the Doctrine of consideration has created a number of rules that if not satisfied the agreement will not be legally binding.

  1. What are the advantages of a bill of exchange over other methods of payment?

    In order to see how bills of exchange rank in relation to these in terms of usefulness and comparative advantage it will be pertinent to first explain the workings of these other methods of payment to establish their own merits.

  2. Promissory Estoppel is a shield not a sword

    prevents a party from insisting on his strict legal rights when it would be unjust to allow him to do so having regard to the dealings which have taken place between the parties."14 In this way promissory estoppel cannot be used as a sword against another and affirms its use

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