Welcome to Law forums for and by law students!
Law forum, law students, law subjects

You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user. Sign up or
Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions.

Help urgently needed: the doctrine of promissory estoppel!

Discussion in 'Contract Law' started by ThisBeTheVerse, Oct 23, 2011.

  1. ThisBeTheVerse New law student

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Under what circumstances (if any) could a debtor argue the doctrine of promissory estoppel if they had relied on a creditor’s acceptance of PART of the payment (who have SPECIFICALLY indicated that they’d accept PART of the payment in full satisfaction on the debtor’s debt of £ X under the initial loan agreement)?

    I'd really appreciate some guidance; my head is about to explode.
    Thank you.
    ThisBeTheVerse, Oct 23, 2011
    #1

  2. Molineux Super Moderator

    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    28
    The structure of your answer should contain the following

    The doctrine of consideration, enforcement of agreement, in law.
    Cases applying strict interpretation for want of consideration, specifically in part payment cases, in law
    The role and legitimacy of intervention by the Court of Equity.
    The development of promissory estoppe and the specific circumstances (reliance, detriment, shield etc all must be present at the same time) at which promissory estoppel may be applied

    I shall leave it to you, to decide what should be just a sentence or two and what should be a full paragraph to address specifically the question asked, to score well or get a mere pass.
    Molineux, Oct 24, 2011
    #2
    ThisBeTheVerse likes this.

  3. ThisBeTheVerse New law student

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Hiya,

    Thanks very much for your response; I really appreciate it.

    This question isn't an essay question. It's a question that has sprung to mind after reading a moot problem to do with consideration and Promissory Estoppel. I'm arguing for the debtor's case in an appeal case in the House of Lords; I just wondered whether the debtor is able to use this principle against the other party, even though the creditor stuck to the original terms of the loan agreement when they accepted the debtor's redundancy payment.

    This is an area of contract law that I have read up on, but I'm finding it incredibly hard to come up with arguments for the appellant in this case.

    Regards.
    ThisBeTheVerse, Oct 24, 2011
    #3

  4. Molineux Super Moderator

    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Whether it is an essay or problem question, the structure is the same. You need to dismiss each either in one sentence or one paragraph. What is missing in your case?
    Molineux, Oct 24, 2011
    #4

  5. slobrob Moderator

    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    28
    you could use policy arguments?
    slobrob, Oct 25, 2011
    #5

  6. Molineux Super Moderator

    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    28
    You will succeed if there was detriment (for you to argue) and there shall not be reliance without detriment. Of course as far as as estoppel stands, it is only a limited shield for the period where there was detriment.
    Molineux, Oct 26, 2011
    #6

Share This Page