NettetAjax Cooke Pty Ltd v. Nugent (Phillips J, Supreme Court of Victoria, 29 November 1993 unreported).....pp102–103, 106, 113, 115, 117 Alghussein Establishment v. Eton College[1988] 1WLR 587.....pp111–112 Amalgamated Investment & Property Co Ltd v. Texas Commercial International Bank NettetJorden v Money (1854). Representations of intention enforced only on contract. Estoppel by representation only as facts, and used only defensively. "Common law estoppel", "estoppel in pais". the mess at the time? Promissory estoppel; central london high trees 1947; hughes v metrololitan railway 1877; Legione v Hateley (1983) 152 CLR 406, 430-1.
Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd
NettetThis principle was distinguished in Jorden v Money [1854] but in High Tree's it was not a statement but a promise and so Denning created promissory estoppel where the estoppel is based on promises and intention. This principle was then re-clarified with the case of Combe v Combe [1951]. NettetThe earlier decision of the House of Lords in JORDEN v MONEY (1854 ) was distinguished by Denning J in the High Trees case: Money owed Mrs Jorden £1,200, … jammies crossword
Tort - Promissory Estoppel Flashcards - Cram.com
NettetDOUGLAS V. VINCENT 731 Edward Cookes the father, to settle the reversion of his estate at Wick, after the death of him and his wife, and to allow his son twenty pounds per ann. for maintenance in the mean time, and Mascall to settle reversions of copyholds, part after the death of himself and wife, of the value of eighty pounds per ann. Nettetevident i.e. in direct conflict with Jorden v Money (1854) 10 ER 856. - Proprietary estoppel was a cause of action, the end result of which could be transfer of property from the defendant to the plaintiff. - Proprietary estoppel was not confined to cases in which the parties were in a pre-existing contractual relationship. jammie robinson south carolina