xs
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more
Law Cases
Contract Law Cases
Promissory Estoppel Cases

Commonwealth of Australia v Verwayen [1990] 170 CLR 394

Country:
United Kingdom
By Oxbridge Law Team
Mason CJ
RELATED CASES

  • Commonwealth of Australia (C) sank Verwayen's (V) boat and C said that it would not, as a policy, take advantage of statute of limitations and therefore it would have to admit liability.

  • When V prosecuted them in a tortious action, C tried to use the statute of limitations whose use it had claimed that it would forego.

  • V argued that it could not use those statutes, promissory estoppel preventing it.

  • The High Court said that there was no waiver 

Mason CJ

  • All types of estoppel serve the same purpose: “protection against the detriment which would flow from a party's change of position if the assumption (or expectation) that led to it were deserted”- From Walton.

  • The promise must relate to existing fact, NOT future fact or mere intention.

  • Furthermore the promise must be that the promisor will consider themselves bound by their promise: here there was no such indication, even though V may have wrongly interpreted it this way.

    • I.e. an objective test is used: what they are really asking is whether a reasonable person would consider the promisor to have bound themselves. 

RELATED CASES

Any comments or edits about this case?
Get in touch

Similar cases

Walton Stores v Maher
Plaintiff entered negotiations with Defendant about Defendant knocking down a building and building a new one to Plaintiff’s specifications that Plaintiff would lease. When 40% of the work was comple...
Gillett v Holt
Estoppel is a legal principle that prevents a party from breaking their word when someone else has relied on it to their detriment. Proprietary estoppel deals with promises about property or land rig...
Ajayi v Briscoe
Defendant had trouble with lorries that he had was using on a hire-purchase basis from Plaintiff, and Plaintiff had said that he could delay payment while the lorries were being fixed by the Plaintif...
Baird Textile Holdings Ltd v Marks and Spencer Plc
Baird Textile Holdings (B) had supplied Marks and Spencer (M) for 30 years and when M cancelled its contract. It it sued for lost profits, claiming either that there was an implied term of reasonable...
Re The New York Star
Plaintiff contracted X to convey packages to the destination. Defendant, stevedores contracted by X to unload the ship, negligently allowed the packages to be stolen in the course of the unloading. T...

Related free notes samples

Contract Law Problem Question Su...
From the AuthorContract law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambrid

logo

Ambitious and intelligent students
choose Oxbridge Notes.

©2024 Oxbridge Notes. All right reserved.