I'm currently taking Business Law for Accounting and Finance- my first class in 10 years. I am so grateful for these videos. I'd be completely lost without them!
Sounds like you used the Iowa Farmland Precedent... Rock Solid Supreme Court Case and Ruling... Good video... And Yes, in case anyone wonders, Promissory Estoppel is a 2-Edged Sword...
Its on topic of consideration..please help me to solve this question Cruisers plc, a car leasing company enter into contracts in January with each Donald, Edwina and Fiona. Cruisers agree to hire a car to each of them for a period of three (3) years for £400 monthly. Donald, Edwina and Fiona each takes delivery of their respected cars that month. Subsequent international incidents cause a sharp rise in the rate of inflation. By February, the Cruisers are aware that many of their customers will face difficulty in maintaining payment under their contracts. In order to avoid possible breaches of a large number of these contracts, Cruisers sends out a standard letter to each of their clients. The letter states that “In view of rapidly rising costs, Cruisers will only require their customers to pay three (3) quarters of the amount due under their agreement with Cruisers until the rate of increased costs subsides”. Donald receives the letter but did not open it. In February, March and April he sends Cruisers cheques for £200 ‘in full and final satisfaction of this month’s account’. Cruisers bank each of these cheques Edwina receives the letter in late February, after she had sent Cruisers £300 cheque with an accompanying letter stating that in view of her increased costs, that amount was all she could afford.When Fiona receives Cruisers standard letter she is pleased, as the nature of her business is such that her business is little effected by rising costs. Cruisers, later realising the limited impact upon Fiona’s business, sends a letter stating that the reduction arrangement did not apply to Fiona. Fiona reads this letter and immediately sends Cruiser a cheque of £300 for February’s payment. She also did this for March and April. By May, Cruises faces financial ruin if it continues to accept only there (3) quarters of the amounts due under its various contracts. Advise Cruisers as to its possible courses of action with regard to Donald, Edwina and Fiona.
But what if the land owner (the promissor) ,since no particular price was negotiated, decides to place an unreasonable high price tag to the land, even after time effort and money have been spent on this land. What happens then? The land owner did not back out of the contract. And the law states the consideration need not be adequate
Thank you sm... but we have been taught that it isnt necessary for the promisee to suffer detriment and it is enough for the promisee on reliance of that promise to carry out his activities based on it.
The promisee must suffer a detriment if the promise or assurance made by the promissor is not fulfilled. So, the likelihood to suffer a detriment is necessary. Actually suffering the detriment is not required.
promissory estoppel is commonly used as a shield instd of a sword in courts. in the example that u had mentioned, won't it be used as a sword instd? thank you!
@@acapspawn Yeah, it's not like someone would lie about an unwritten promise made to them. Everyone is honest and forthright, especially when it comes to money and property.
The more that I hear about this the more that I'm kind of convinced that my company is engaging in this type of behavior. Still doing some work to understand it all, but I'm pretty sure this has happened
Thanks for this very simplified summary of the topic. I have exams in a few weeks so doing my revision using your summaries. Very helpful.
Thank you so much for posting this important definition. I just started a contract law course.
Best explanation on you tube I hv seen so far
I'm currently taking Business Law for Accounting and Finance- my first class in 10 years. I am so grateful for these videos. I'd be completely lost without them!
Looks like you need to claim a promissory estoppel against your school, bro. Paying their tuition fees and still need free YT vids?? :O
@@alphaforce6998xD
Extremely useful! Very easy to understand with examples, thank you very much :)
Sounds like you used the Iowa Farmland Precedent... Rock Solid Supreme Court Case and Ruling... Good video... And Yes, in case anyone wonders, Promissory Estoppel is a 2-Edged Sword...
Thank you! This was a very helpful summary.
Very nice explanation 😀😀
This explaination is best! Thank you so much!
thanks alot. Cool accent too
yes indeed commitments are valuable in general our social life and legal relation.
Its on topic of consideration..please help me to solve this question
Cruisers plc, a car leasing company enter into contracts in January with each
Donald, Edwina and Fiona. Cruisers agree to hire a car to each of them for a
period of three (3) years for £400 monthly. Donald, Edwina and Fiona each
takes delivery of their respected cars that month. Subsequent international
incidents cause a sharp rise in the rate of inflation. By February, the Cruisers
are aware that many of their customers will face difficulty in maintaining
payment under their contracts. In order to avoid possible breaches of a large
number of these contracts, Cruisers sends out a standard letter to each of
their clients. The letter states that “In view of rapidly rising costs, Cruisers
will only require their customers to pay three (3) quarters of the amount due
under their agreement with Cruisers until the rate of increased costs
subsides”.
Donald receives the letter but did not open it. In February, March and April he
sends Cruisers cheques for £200 ‘in full and final satisfaction of this month’s
account’. Cruisers bank each of these cheques
Edwina receives the letter in late February, after she had sent Cruisers £300
cheque with an accompanying letter stating that in view of her increased
costs, that amount was all she could afford.When Fiona receives Cruisers standard letter she is pleased, as the nature of
her business is such that her business is little effected by rising costs.
Cruisers, later realising the limited impact upon Fiona’s business, sends a letter stating that the reduction arrangement did not apply to Fiona.
Fiona reads this letter and immediately sends Cruiser a cheque of £300 for
February’s payment. She also did this for March and April.
By May, Cruises faces financial ruin if it continues to accept only there (3)
quarters of the amounts due under its various contracts.
Advise Cruisers as to its possible courses of action with regard to Donald, Edwina and Fiona.
great explanation
Great content
You are the man
Thanks a lot, very helpful.
But what if the land owner (the promissor) ,since no particular price was negotiated, decides to place an unreasonable high price tag to the land, even after time effort and money have been spent on this land. What happens then? The land owner did not back out of the contract. And the law states the consideration need not be adequate
***** Thanks a lot
You're awesome
Thank you Fred from Scooby doo
super good right on point thanks you are are a great teacher. love to see and hear more you are a wealth of knowlegde.
take care god bless
Good, thanks.
Holy shit thanks this was so clear, thanks so much!!
Thank you sm... but we have been taught that it isnt necessary for the promisee to suffer detriment and it is enough for the promisee on reliance of that promise to carry out his activities based on it.
The promisee must suffer a detriment if the promise or assurance made by the promissor is not fulfilled. So, the likelihood to suffer a detriment is necessary. Actually suffering the detriment is not required.
very helpful. thank you!
I thought the promisee did not necessarily have to rely on the promisor's promise to his detriment?
thank you !!! this helped a lot!
promissory estoppel is commonly used as a shield instd of a sword in courts. in the example that u had mentioned, won't it be used as a sword instd?
thank you!
+Yuhao Xu no its still a shield. the promisee can only claim for what he had loss or other injunctions.
@@acapspawn Yeah, it's not like someone would lie about an unwritten promise made to them. Everyone is honest and forthright, especially when it comes to money and property.
I thought with land that exception to the statute of frauds in part performance; possession, payment, improvement... 2 of the 3 were met.
Thank you!
The liability for dealing in constructive trust and debtor bonds in New Zealand is 14 year's in prison.......
New Zealand Crimes Act 1961 section 98.
Thank you.
Thank you
The more that I hear about this the more that I'm kind of convinced that my company is engaging in this type of behavior. Still doing some work to understand it all, but I'm pretty sure this has happened
Estop: bar, preclude
This guy should be a teacher or something.
Very helpful, thank you!