Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Any attempt to use promissory estoppel will fail if the debtor behaves inequitably: D&C Builders v Rees[1966] [18] Pay more; One party refuses to perform her side of the contract unless a larger sum of money is paid. [19] For example, Christine agrees to sell Julian a set of textbooks for $300.
Promissory estoppel is a separate cause of action to breach of contract, requiring separate elements to be shown. It has the effect that in many contract like situations, the requirement of consideration need not be present. [5] The elements of promissory estoppel are: an express or implied promise;
The official 2007 edition of the UCC. The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), first published in 1952, is one of a number of uniform acts that have been established as law with the goal of harmonizing the laws of sales and other commercial transactions across the United States through UCC adoption by all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the Territories of the United States.
An Appellate Division, First Department panel rejected the reliance-based argument of promissory estoppel by the plaintiff, indicating that he would not suffer an unfair injury if the statute of ...
Based upon recent case pronouncements by both New York’s highest court and federal courts, the doctrine of promissory estoppel should be invoked with selectivity, particularly when used to ...
Estoppel by representation of fact and promissory estoppel are mutually exclusive: the former is based on a representation of existing fact (or of mixed fact and law), while the latter is based on a promise not to enforce some pre-existing right (i.e. it expresses an intention as to the future).
Promissory estoppel 1; Quantum meruit 1; Unjust enrichment; Restitution; Negotiorum gestio 2; Duties of parties; Duty of honest contractual performance (or doctrine of abuse of rights) 6; Duty of good faith (also implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing or duty to negotiate in good faith) 7. Contract A and Contract B in Canadian contract ...
The parol evidence rule is a rule in common law jurisdictions limiting the kinds of evidence parties to a contract dispute can introduce when trying to determine the specific terms of a contract [1] and precluding parties who have reduced their agreement to a final written document from later introducing other evidence, such as the content of oral discussions from earlier in the negotiation ...