Overview of Promissory Estoppel

You can register for live online classes for Public Law, Criminal Law, Legal System and Contract Law at www.bsolpk.org...
What is promissory estoppel? In this video, we explain the equitable concept that it is; demonstrating its use in cases where there is no sufficient consideration to make a binding contract, only a mere promise by the promisor. The question that then arises, is whether a promise can be enforced without consideration? In Jorden v Money (1854), this concept was rejected, only to be later taken up in the case of Hughes v Metropolitan Railway Company (1877) and established as a rule by Lord Denning in the famous case of Central Property London Trust Ltd. v High Trees Ltd. (1947).
Exam Prep (Books):
Question & Answer Contract Law: amzn.to/2xUm5YC
Optimize Contract Law: amzn.to/2RnvGiy
Where can you find out more?
Follow us on each of our social media platforms:
Facebook: / swbil
Instagram: / swbil
OR
Visit our website: www.bsolpk.org/

[@marcusearle1035]

Thank you so much for this video! This explanation makes it so much clearer than a textbook ever could!

[@parideol225]

it would be of great help if you take pause in between as for us to retain . moreover do mention case names too as just staring at screen distracts the mind alot .

[@amandastephens6300]

great video...it would be so much better if you put up the cases on the screen thank you

[@SWBIL]

Thanks for the feedback we will keep that in mind in future videos.

[@cbb3D]

Thanks, that's basically my moot subject for Tuesday that I procrastinated haha

[@SWBIL]

You're welcome! Please share the lecture with you mates and don't forget to like and subscribe.

[@ashishag9595]

Mam u teach well

[@TheNewTakeFilms]

Thanks so much for this video. helps to finally understand!

[@SWBIL]

You're welcome! Please share, like and subscribe so we can add more lectures.

[@drummerboy1066]

But wasn't the approach in Hughes based on the conduct of the parties, rather than express promise not to enforce a strict legal right? As such, Hughes doesn't seem to provide any authority for Denning's approach to make a promise binding - to the extent that the right to the arrears had been completely extinguished (not supported by Hughes at all!).

[@fiktv8341]

Good