Log in

Relevant bibliographies by topics / Law of estoppel / Journal articles

To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Law of estoppel.

Journal articles on the topic 'Law of estoppel'

Author: Grafiati

Published: 4 June 2021

Last updated: 1 February 2022

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles

Select a source type:

Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Law of estoppel.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.

1

Dawson, T. Brettel. "Estoppel and obligation: the modern role of estoppel by convention." Legal Studies 9, no. 1 (March 1989): 16–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-121x.1989.tb00384.x.

Full text

Abstract:

Even the casual observer of trends in estoppel jurisprudence may have noted that discussions of promissory estoppel have recently become less ubiquitous in reported decisions. What may have been less apparent, but of no less significance, is that during this period there has been an upsurge of interest in estoppel by convention as a basis for judicial action. Although this doctrine was once referred to as being ‘as old as the hills’, it had languished in judicial and academic obscurity for many years prior to current interest. More recently it has been hailed as ‘an essential arrow in the quiver of every commercial counsel’. This phenomenon has occurred against the backdrop of a proliferation of so-called ‘equitable’ and proprietary estoppels, and judicial and scholarly exasperation at the disorder into which estoppel issues generally appeared to have fallen.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

Roor, K. A. "The Concept and Essence of Estoppel." Actual Problems of Russian Law, no. 7 (July 1, 2018): 71–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2018.92.7.071-081.

Full text

Abstract:

The article considers the issue of determining the legal nature of prohibition of changeable conduct committed for an unlawful purpose. The study is based on the analysis of civil law specific principles operation when estoppel is applied. The conclusion is drawn that the basis of estoppel lies in the operation of several principles of civil law, and the main principle is the principle of good faith. The rule of estoppel demonstrates the lack of consistency among civil law principles, when they are allowed to compete with each other. The article provides an overview of opinions with respect of estoppel definitions given in the Russian scientific literature. This is necessary to solve the problem of implementing rules concerning estoppel in the Russian legal system, since the law-maker has followed the path of enshrining certain kinds of estoppels in the legislation rather than formulating a universal rule that prohibits inconsistent and evasive behavior in the Civil Code of the RF. The author proposed an independent definition of estoppel as a universal category.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

Dixon, Martin. "ESTOPPEL, UNCONSCIONABILITY AND FORMALITIES IN LAND LAW." Cambridge Law Journal 59, no. 3 (November 16, 2000): 421–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197300310200.

Full text

Abstract:

KEN Holt was a wealthy farmer in Lincolnshire. In 1952 he befriended Geoffrey Gillett and then persuaded the young man to work on the farm instead of continuing at school. For nearly 40 years, Gillett was Holt’s right arm, a relationship that did not falter when Gillett married. Over these years, when Gillett managed the farm and eventually entered into partnership with Holt, Holt repeatedly promised that Gillett would be the principal beneficiary of his will. These were no idle boasts, but were repeated often, in public, and were given effect in several versions of Holt’s will. In 1992, Holt formed a friendship with Mr Wood (a trainee solicitor), the result of which was the eventual breakdown of his relations with the Gillett family and their exclusion from his will. In Gillett v. Holt [2000] 3 W.L.R 815 Geoffrey Gillett asserted that Holt was estopped from changing his will so as to deny Gillett his expected legacy. As we might think, a simple case of proprietary estoppel based on assurance, reliance and detriment. However, Carnwath J. at first instance thought otherwise and rejected estoppel because first, Gillett could not establish that Holt had made an irrevocable promise not to change his will (and everyone knows that wills may be changed), and secondly, Gillett had suffered no detriment.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

Chereshneva, Irina. "Estoppel in Russia: to articulation of the problem." Право и политика, no. 9 (September 2020): 81–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.7256/2454-0706.2020.9.33913.

Full text

Abstract:

Due to continuing interest of legal community to the problematic of preventing contradictory behavior or in the Anglo-American legal tradition – estoppel, the subject of this research is an attempt of determination of legal nature of the so-called norms of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on estoppel. The selected topic is relevant due to the fact that there is no unanimity of opinions regarding the nature of estoppel; it is viewed as interdisciplinary principle, doctrine, institution of law, sanction for violation of the principle of good faith, one of the manifestations of the principle of good faith, legal mechanisms etc. An attempt is made to view estoppel from different perspectives: through the prism of the English promissory stopper, from the position of continental maxim “venire contra factum proprium", in relation with the principle of good faith. The conclusion is made that the so-called norms on estoppel in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation represent a special case of the doctrine of noncontradictory behavior, known to the continental legal order through the maxim “venire contra factum proprium", which is a manifestation of the principle of good faith. Based on this fact, it is inappropriate to designate the aforementioned norms as estoppel, since even in Anglo-American tradition, the variety of estoppels does not allow considering it a universal principle, and understanding of estoppel thereof does not correspond with its Russian interpretation. Moreover, being a part of Romano-Germanic legal family, there is no need for the Russian legal order to borrow foreign legal phenomena, especially when the evolution of similar legal constructs can be traced in the fold of continental system of law, which Russia belongs to.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

Halliwell, Margaret. "Estoppel: unconscionability as a cause of action." Legal Studies 14, no. 1 (March 1994): 15–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-121x.1994.tb00563.x.

Full text

Abstract:

The current distinctions between different forms of estoppel are inappropriate and traditional orthodoxy is being challenged by judges and by academics. It is now necessary to recognise that the organising concept for the doctrine of estoppel is unconscionability because the function of estoppel is to restrain injustice arising from unconscionable conduct. The form ofestoppel, known as promissory estoppel, and stemming from the decision in Central London Property Ltd u High Trees House Ltd, is not triggered by the organising concept of unconscionability. It should be regarded, therefore, as an exceptional contractual response, in various situations, to the requirement of consideration. It follows that, in principle, estoppel based upon the concept of unconscionability, may be employed as an independent cause of action. There is ample evidence that this already happens in the context of claims concerning land. This article seeks to demonstrate that estoppel can and should be treated as an independent cause of action in a more general context.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

Long, Tran Thang. "The Application of Estoppel in International Law and Experiences for Vietnam." Vietnamese Journal of Legal Sciences 1, no. 1 (June 1, 2020): 89–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/vjls-2020-0006.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractIn international relation, estoppel is a principle whereby a state is not able to say or act against what it said or did before. The theory of estoppel was originated in the past from the English law system, which was later incorporated into international law. Its main purpose is to prevent a State from benefiting from its inconsistent attitudes, and thus, causing damage to another State. Therefore, estoppel must meet the main conditions. First, the expression of the said State leads to the assumption of the estoppel must be clear and non-ambiguous. Second, this expression must be expressed voluntarily, unconditionally and must be well authorized. Third, there must be a goodwill trust from another State into the expression of a State giving that expression, resulting in damage to the State with this trust or to the benefit of the expressive side. The paper examines the principle of estoppel in international law and the practice of applying this principle in cases tried at the International Court of Justice. On that basis, the paper discusses explaining the factors that constitute an estoppel situation for Vietnam in order to reject the China’s wrong interpretation of the 1958 Diplomatic Note of the late Prime Minister Pham Van Dong.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Bright, Susan, and Ben McFarlane. "PROPRIETARY ESTOPPEL AND PROPERTY RIGHTS." Cambridge Law Journal 64, no. 2 (July 7, 2005): 449–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197305006926.

Full text

Abstract:

THIS article focuses on a particular aspect of the operation of proprietary estoppel: it asks when a proprietary estoppel claim will give rise to a property right. The inquiry proceeds on the linked assumptions that proprietary estoppel is a means of acquiring rights and that rights thereby arising take effect immediately, without the need for any court order. Like any other means of acquiring rights, proprietary estoppel can give rise either to personal rights or to property rights: in some cases the estoppel claimant is acknowledged to have a personal right (e.g. to damages or a licence to use land); in others a property right (e.g. a lien; an easement; a lease; or a freehold). The central argument of this article is that proprietary estoppel should give rise to a property right only if that is necessary to protect the claimant’s reasonable reliance. Where a personal right gives sufficient protection that will have to do, whatever the claimant may have been promised or expected; this may well mean that the circumstances in which a property right arises are more narrow than has been thought.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

Magomedova, M. A., and Sh A. Khizriev. "THE PRINCIPLE OF ESTOPPEL IN THE ARBITRATION (ARBITRATION)." Law Нerald of Dagestan State University 35, no. 3 (2020): 117–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.21779/2224-0241-2020-35-3-117-120.

Full text

Abstract:

The article is devoted to the institution of estoppel, which is new for Russian law. Based on the analysis of the opinions of scientists regarding the legal nature of estoppel and its definitions, the author comes to the conclusion that the estoppelеin arbitration (arbitration) is a principle of law that guarantees the fair procedural behavior of the parties to the arbitration. The article analyzes the norms of the federal law on arbitration, which contain the rules of estoppel, which made it possible to define estoppel in arbitration proceedings and classify it into types.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

Klimchuk, Dennis. "State Estoppel." Law and Philosophy 39, no. 3 (March 18, 2020): 297–323. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10982-019-09372-4.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

Dixon, Martin. "Confining and defining proprietary estoppel: the role of unconscionability." Legal Studies 30, no. 3 (September 2010): 408–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-121x.2010.00162.x.

Full text

Abstract:

The use of proprietary estoppel to make or support claims to property is now common. Case-law tells us that the concept of unconscionability is central to a successful claim, but little guidance is provided as to what ‘unconscionability’ means or how it is to be established. It is often assumed rather than explained. This paper argues that unconscionability in fact has a reasonably clear meaning within the law of proprietary estoppel and that it can be used to define and confine proprietary estoppel within reasonably clear boundaries. It seeks to explain that proprietary estoppel is at heart an antidote to a lack of required formality in the creation or transfer of property rights and, consequently, that the proper meaning of unconscionability is linked to these formality requirements. Unconscionability is therefore not a cover for unregulated judicial discretion, nor a loose term to describe a general sense of unfairness, but a concept which can be used to discriminate objectively between valid and invalid estoppel claims.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

Mysoor, Poorna. "Proprietary Estoppel and Copyright Law." King's Law Journal 29, no. 3 (September 2, 2018): 470–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09615768.2018.1549692.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

Mak, V. "Estoppel vanuit civil law perspectief." Maandblad voor Vermogensrecht 13, no. 1 (January 2015): 3–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.5553/mvv/157457672015013001002.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Robertson, Andrew. "Reliance and expectation in estoppel remedies." Legal Studies 18, no. 3 (September 1998): 360–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-121x.1998.tb00022.x.

Full text

Abstract:

The word ‘estoppel’ had its origins in the old French word ‘estoup’, meaning plug or stopper. The principle of estoppel by representation of fact operates in a manner which is consistent with those origins. Where a representation of fact is relied upon by a representee, the effect of the estoppel is to stop up the mouth of the representor, and prevent him or her from asserting facts contrary to his or her own representation. The rights of the parties are then determined by reference to the represented or assumed state of affairs. An estoppel by representation of fact can be used defensively, where an action which would otherwise be available to the plaintiff is not available on the assumed state of affairs. It can also be used aggressively, to establish a state of affairs in which a cause of action exists, where that cause of action would not be available on the true state of affairs.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

Thomson, Joshua. "Estoppel by Representation in Administrative Law." Federal Law Review 26, no. 1 (March 1998): 83–113. http://dx.doi.org/10.22145/flr.26.1.4.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

Ishibashi, Michael, and Amarjit Singh. "Evolution of Common Law: Promissory Estoppel." Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction 3, no. 4 (November 2011): 170–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(asce)la.1943-4170.0000040.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

Thomson, Joshua. "Estoppel by Representation in Administrative Law." Federal Law Review 26, no. 1 (March 1998): 83–113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0067205x9802600104.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

Milne, Patrick. "Proprietary estoppel and wills." Cambridge Law Journal 58, no. 1 (March 1999): 1–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197399291015.

Full text

Abstract:

WHEN is a promise to benefit someone on one's death an enforceable promise? This was the question for the High Court in Gillett v. Holt and Another [1998] 3 All E.R. 917. As Carnwath J. recognised, the difficulty lies in reconciling proprietary estoppel with the principle that “[s]ubject to specific exceptions (such as for dependants), the right to decide, and change one's mind as to, the devolution of one's estate is a basic and well understood feature of English law”.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Nield, Sarah. "Constructive trusts and estoppel." Legal Studies 23, no. 2 (June 2003): 311–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-121x.2003.tb00216.x.

Full text

Abstract:

Repeated comments are made as to the similarity between the common intention constructive trust and proprietary estoppel, but there remains considerable confusion over the precise nature of this interrelationship. The constituent elements of each doctrine bear close comparison and, although their respective modes of operation remain distinct, they may lead to similar results. The recent redefinition of the Pallant v Morgan equity provides an opportunity to probe once more the interrelationship between these doctrines. The Pallant v Morgan1 equity explores the operation of the Rochefoucauld v Boustead2 doctrine in the context of the joint acquisition of land and demonstrates the enforceability of express oral intention based upon a wider range of unconscionablity than the detriment based conduct which dominates both the common intention constructive trust and estoppel.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

Hill, Jonathan. "The Termination of Bare Licences." Cambridge Law Journal 60, no. 1 (March 2001): 89–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197301000630.

Full text

Abstract:

IN principle, the law relating to the termination of bare (or gratuitous) licences should be relatively simple. Bare licences do not enjoy statutory protection and a bare licence cannot impose contractual obligations on the licensor. There are, however, four elements which complicate the law. First, through the operation of the doctrine of proprietary estoppel, the licensor may be estopped from revoking a bare licence. Second, a licence which has been acted upon is not revocable. Third, on revocation of a bare licence, the licensee must be given a reasonable “period of grace” or “packing-up period”. Fourth, it is sometimes said that a bare licence may be revoked only “on reasonable notice.” These four elements overlap (in part) and, in the case law and academic literature, there is some degree of confusion. The difficulties which exist can be resolved by more rigorous analysis.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

Dixon, Martin. "Adverse Possession—Compromises and Estoppel." Cambridge Law Journal 51, no. 3 (November 1992): 420–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197300084749.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

Webster, Peter. "Ben McFarlane, The Law of Proprietary Estoppel." Edinburgh Law Review 20, no. 1 (January 2016): 118–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/elr.2016.0336.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

Atrill, Simon. "THE END OF ESTOPPEL IN PUBLIC LAW." Cambridge Law Journal 62, no. 1 (March 1, 2003): 3–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197303226210.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

Vagni, Laura. "Proprietary Estoppel: an italian case law perspective." CUADERNOS DE DERECHO TRANSNACIONAL 13, no. 1 (March 8, 2021): 657. http://dx.doi.org/10.20318/cdt.2021.5975.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

Gan, Orit. "A Feminist Economic Perspective on Contract Law: Promissory Estoppel as an Example." Michigan Journal of Gender & Law, no. 28.1 (2021): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.36641/mjgl.28.1.feminist.

Full text

Abstract:

Economic analysis is a highly influential theoretical approach to contract law. At the same time, feminist analysis of contract law offers an important critical approach to the field. However, feminist economics, a prominent alternative approach to mainstream neo-classical economics drawing from both economic theory and feminist theory, has only been applied scarcely and sporadically to contract law. This Article seeks to bridge this gap and to apply the key features of feminist economics to an analysis of the doctrine of promissory estoppel. This Article uses promissory estoppel as an example to demonstrate a feminist economic analysis of contract law.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

Sorokina, Iuliia. "Estoppel and failure to exercise a right." Юридические исследования, no. 3 (March 2020): 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.25136/2409-7136.2020.3.32645.

Full text

Abstract:

The subject of this research is legal relations emerging as a result of unlawful, inconsistent and contradictory behavior of one of the parties. As one of the most common version of such behavior cited the temporary failure of one of the sides in the situation to exercise the right, while the other side reasonably relies on permanent failure to exercise the right. The article examines the examples of unlawful irregular and contradictory behavior that can be observed in the general and special parts of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, as well as Russian case law and legal doctrine. Analysis is conducted on the position of foreign research on estoppel as a principle of law. A conclusion is made that in the Russian law estoppel represents prohibition of unlawful, inconsistent and contradictory behavior, being a private case of prohibition for unscrupulous behavior. Such approach allows applying the rule of “estoppel” to a situation that is not directly designated in legislation, which can be observed in case law. It is substantiated that the rule of “estoppel” is also contained in the Part 3 of the Article 1044 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Correspondingly, this rule is also applied in a case where one of the parties acted without proper right, while the other party reasonably expected its presence.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

Bray, Judith. "Thorner v Major and others [2009] 1 WLR 776." Denning Law Journal 22, no. 1 (November 26, 2012): 175–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.5750/dlj.v22i1.358.

Full text

Abstract:

PROPRIETARY ESTOPPEL: A NEW CHAPTER DAWNS?The decision of the Court of Appeal in Thorner v Major1 briefly constructed an almost impossible strait-jacket around potential claimants under proprietary estoppel, reminiscent of the way the strict requirements under the Willmot v Barber2 probanda had earlier limited such claims3. The Court of Appeal held in Thorner v Major4 that an assurance of rights had to be clear and unequivocal in order to give rise to property rights and on the facts of this case the assurances had been too vague to give rise to such rights. In an area of law based on informality and often vague promises it appeared that the law was now in retrenchment and was reasserting the need for very strict limitations on the circumstances in which property claims under proprietary estoppel could arise.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Andrews, N. H. "Issue Estoppel and Changes of Precedent." Cambridge Law Journal 50, no. 3 (November 1991): 419–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197300016160.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

Cooke, Elizabeth. "Estoppel and the protection of expectations." Legal Studies 17, no. 2 (July 1997): 258–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-121x.1997.tb00407.x.

Full text

Abstract:

Does the law of estoppel remedy reliance loss, or protect and grant expectations? In 1983 it was said that:‘This is a question that the courts must decide once and for all, and … they must not shirk from providing an answer by pretending that that answer will vary according to the facts of each particular case.’This article examines a view about this question which I shall call the ‘reliance loss theory’, which states that the normal response to a successful plea of estoppel is to compensate the claimant's reliance loss rather than to fulfil his expectations; in other words, that the court will, if possible, remedy the detriment he has already suffered in reliance upon what the other has said, without going to the lengths of obliging that other to abide by, or fulfil, what he has led the claimant to believe by his conduct or silence. The reliance loss theory has been presented as a description of what actually happens, but it also appears as an argument for what the law should be.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Milne, Patrick. "Proprietary Estoppel in a Procrustean Bed." Modern Law Review 58, no. 3 (May 1995): 412–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1995.tb02019.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

Harpum, Charles. "Exclusion Clauses and Contracts for the Sale of Land." Cambridge Law Journal 51, no. 2 (July 1992): 263–307. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s000819730009557x.

Full text

Abstract:

This article is a study of judicial attitudes to exclusion clauses in contracts for the sale of land. It examines the various devices which the courts have developed in order to limit the effect of such clauses and suggests that one of these devices has emerged as paramount: the principle that a vendor may, in appropriate circumstances, be estopped from relying on a condition by reason of his knowledge or conduct. One form of this estoppel will be shown to be of particular importance. This is the “well-established rule of equity” that a vendor of land cannot rely on a condition of sale, framed in general terms, to cover a specific encumbrance or other defect in title of which the vendor knew or ought to have known, and which he failed to disclose to the purchaser prior to contracting. The culmination of the article is a study of the rationale and precise manner of operation of this rule-which for convenience will be called the “no-disclosure, no-reliance” rule.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

Ivkova, Anna V., and Yelizaveta S. Krotova. "Certain features of using of the "estoppel" doctrine in civil proceedings of the Russian Federation." Vestnik of Kostroma State University, no. 3 (2019): 167–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.34216/1998-0817-2019-25-3-167-171.

Full text

Abstract:

The "estoppel" concept and the issues of applying the "estoppel" rule in international law and Russian civil law are considered in this paper. Procedural legislation novels stipulated in the Concept of the Unified Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, approved by the Committee on Civil, Criminal, Arbitration and Procedural Legislation of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on December 8, 2014, are noted here. The authors propose amendments to the civil procedural legislation, which will allow to apply the "estoppel" rule in civil proceedings. Particularly the authors propose to supplement Article 12 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation with part 3, including in it the obligation of the party to act in good faith in the exercise and protection of their rights and obligations. The authors indicate what exactly should be understood as unfair behaviour in this context.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

32

Wright, David. "Giumelli, estoppel and the new law of remedies." Cambridge Law Journal 58, no. 3 (November 1999): 461–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197399263015.

Full text

Abstract:

INGiumelli v. Giumelli (1999) 161 A.L.R. 473 (Gleeson C.J., McHugh, Gummow, Kirby and Callinan JJ.) the High Court of Australia substantially allowed the appeal from the decision of the Full Court of Western Australia, and by doing so confirmed the emergence of a new law of remedies.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

33

Demers, Robert. "L'actionnaire de facto sous la Loi des corporations commerciales canadiennes." Chronique de jurisprudence 19, no. 4 (April 12, 2005): 1081–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/042287ar.

Full text

Abstract:

The right of a de facto shareholder under the Canada Business Corporations Act of becoming a registered holder is specifically dealt with under the statute. Who can be considered as such, however, is not so clear and the rules of common law have to be considered in this context. The basis of de facto relationships in corporate law can be found in the doctrine of estoppel by conduct and the theory of the implied contract. In civil law, as estoppel is unknown, the only foundation left for such a rule is the implied contract. The following note examines these various points from the vista of civilian concepts.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

34

TETTENBORN, ANDREW. "AGENTS, BUSINESS OWNERS AND ESTOPPEL." Cambridge Law Journal 57, no. 2 (July 1998): 274–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197398000026.

Full text

Abstract:

The law has long had to grapple with the person who owns a business but entrusts the running of it to a front man (or “front company”) while he himself remains hidden in the background. The problem is that the ostensible owner may be not worth suing, or that a customer's right of action may lie against him alone so as to prevent it being set-off against a claim by the true owner. Sometimes the law of agency may be available to remedy this situation by attaching liability to the actual business owner: but not always. This article suggests the possibility of using the doctrine of estoppel as a more general means of achieving the same object.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

35

Baughen, Simon. "Estoppels over land and third parties. An open question?" Legal Studies 14, no. 2 (July 1994): 147–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-121x.1994.tb00496.x.

Full text

Abstract:

The proprietary status of the contractual licence has long been a matter of dispute. In Arnold v Ashbum–Anstult the obiter remarks of Fox LJ signalled a return to orthodoxy in this area of the law. Unless a contractual licence can be supported by facts sufficient to support a constructive trust (and these, too, were restrictively defined by Fox LJ), it will not bind third parties. However, Fox W did not discuss rights over land arising by way of estoppel ( ‘estoppel rights’). The proposition that these can bind third parties has never attracted the controversy that surrounded the proprietary status of contractual licences. Nonetheless, due to the potential overlap between the two types of licence, it is a proposition that needs urgent re-evaluation in the light of Fox W’s views on contractual licences.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

36

Du Plessis, Elmien WJ. "Can Estoppel be Raised Against an Eviction in Terms of PIE?" Southern African Public Law 30, no. 2 (December 1, 2017): 434–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.25159/2522-6800/3588.

Full text

Abstract:

Estoppel is a well-known defence against (or limitation on) the rei vindicatio. This would be the case for example where the owner by some representation creates the impression that a third party is the owner of a thing and that the third party has the capacity to alienate the property. The bona fide third party can, when the owner then institutes the rei vindication to recover his property, raise estoppel and preclude the real owner from claiming his property. Before 2002, if one wanted to evict an unlawful occupier from certain residential premises, one would institute the rei vindicatio. In Ndlovu v Ngcobo; Bekker v Jika [2002] 4 All SA 384 (SCA) the court, however, ruled that the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998 (PIE) must be used in all instances of evicting people from urban residential premises. The question is: does estoppel serve as a defence/limit in the application of PIE? Surprisingly few cases deal with this issue. The court in Joe Slovo made a few remarks about the possibility of using estoppel as a defence against the rei vindicatio by looking at the interpretation of ‘tacit consent’ required by PIE. This article will interpret provisions of PIE and look at case law that deals with the use of estoppel in lease cases. It will conclude by remarking on the feasibility of using estoppel as a defence in PIE eviction cases.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

37

Zarzalejos Herrero, Jaime. "Análisis comparado de la cosa juzgada en Derecho inglés = Comparative analysis of the res judicata doctrine under English Law." CUADERNOS DE DERECHO TRANSNACIONAL 10, no. 1 (March 8, 2018): 489. http://dx.doi.org/10.20318/cdt.2018.4131.

Full text

Abstract:

Resumen: El estudio tiene por objeto el análisis comparado entre la regulación de la doctrina de la res judicata o cosa juzgada en Derecho inglés y en el ordenamiento jurídico español. En primer lugar, el artículo analiza la cosa juzgada –y otras figuras preclusivas que producen efectos similares– desde la perspectiva Derecho inglés. En segundo lugar, se abordará su regulación en Derecho español. Finalmente, el trabajo expone una serie de conclusiones en donde se pone de manifiesto las diferencias y similitudes sobre su regulación en ambos ordenamientos.Palabras clave: res judicata, estoppel, Henderson rule.Abstract: The paper analyses the regulation of the res judicata doctrine under English and Spanish law from a comparative perspective. The paper first examines the regulation of the res judicata doctrine –and other pleas which have similar effects– under English law. Secondly, the paper reviews its regulation under Spanish law. The paper ends drawing some conclusions on the differences and similarities under both legal systems.Keywords: res judicata, estoppel, Henderson rule.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

38

Dixon, Martin. "Title by Adverse Possession Lost by Estoppel." Cambridge Law Journal 50, no. 2 (July 1991): 234–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197300080430.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

39

Cooke, Elizabeth. "GUARANTEES, ESTOPPEL AND THE STATUTE OF FRAUDS." Cambridge Law Journal 62, no. 3 (November 3, 2003): 551–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197303306403.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

40

DAVIS, CHRISTINE. "Estoppel: An Adequate Substitute for Part Performance?" Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 13, no. 1 (1993): 99–129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ojls/13.1.99.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

41

Battersby, Graham. "Informal Transactions in Land, Estoppel and Registration." Modern Law Review 58, no. 5 (September 1995): 637–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1995.tb02039.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

42

Gavrilov, Vladimir Nikolaevich, Nikita Vital'evich Tereshchenko, and Anastasiya Andreevna Koryukina. "Estoppel and relinquishment of right in the Russian and foreign legal systems." Юридические исследования, no. 12 (December 2020): 78–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.25136/2409-7136.2020.12.34806.

Full text

Abstract:

This article analyzes the concepts of such legal principle as estoppel. This principle is relatively new for national legislation, and was borrowed from the countries with Anglo-Saxon legal system. The subject of this research is the correlation of rule of estoppel in the Russian and foreign law, as well as its comparison with the relinquishment of right. Its appearance and normative consolidation in the national legislation is the implementation of an important stage in the concept of development of civil legislation. The article also distinguishes between the two similar concepts of civil law: relinquishment of right and waiver. The authors raise a relevant question on the absence of uniform law enforcement practice thereof. Only few scholars within the Russian science are dealing with this topic. Based on the analysis of the aforementioned legal principles and case law, the authors come to a logical conclusion on the need for a clear delineation between the concepts of estoppel and relinquishment of right for achieving uniformity of judicial practice of the Russian Federation. The purpose the examines in the article legal institutions consists in minimization or complete elimination of negative consequences caused by inconsistent behavior of one party, as well as full protection of rights and interests of other party.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

43

Farber, Daniel A., and John H. Matheson. "Beyond Promissory Estoppel: Contract Law and the "Invisible Handshake"." University of Chicago Law Review 52, no. 4 (1985): 903. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1599520.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

44

Elliott, Mark. "Unlawful Representations, Legitimate Expectations and Estoppel in Public Law." Judicial Review 8, no. 2 (June 2003): 71–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10854681.2003.11427252.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

45

Key, Paul. "ESTOPPEL BY REPRESENTATION AS A DEFENCE TO RESTITUTION: THE EXCEPTION PROVES THE RULE?" Cambridge Law Journal 60, no. 3 (November 21, 2001): 441–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197301291193.

Full text

Abstract:

The recognition of the defence of change of position in Lipkin Gorman v. Karpnale Ltd. [1991] 2 A.C. 548 was a landmark for the law of restitution. In the ten years which have followed Lipkin Gorman, courts and academics have been involved in two, closely related, tasks: first, a description of the content and nature of the defence of change of position; and, secondly, an analysis of the relationship between change of position and other defences to restitution. An important aspect of the latter task has been the fundamental re-examination of the role of estoppel by representation as a defence to restitution. Two recent cases in the Court of Appeal, Scottish Equitable plc v. Derby [2001] 3 All E.R. 818 and National Westminster Bank plc v. Somer International (UK) Ltd. [2001] Lloyd’s Rep. Bank. 263, indicate that, although estoppel by representation remains a defence, the practical effect of the defence will often be much more limited than had been previously understood.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

46

Halberda, Jan. "Angielska doktryna promissory estoppel a polska klauzula nadużycia prawa." Krakowskie Studia z Historii Państwa i Prawa 7, no. 2 (2014): 395–404. http://dx.doi.org/10.4467/20844131ks.14.012.2253.

Full text

Abstract:

The English doctrine of promissory estoppel and the Polish clause of abuse of law The article discusses the problem of evolution and the premises used in applying the English concept known as promissory estoppel. The birth of this legal concept has been discussed on the example of the most important court cases, the so called leading cases, such as, among others, that of High Trees (1947) and Combe v. Combe (1951), in which it was lord Denning who adjudicated. In the article, the author also analyzes the general principles of invoking promissory estoppel. He indicates that in the course of a court trial it is necessary to prove the existence of a promise, on the basis of which the person who was promised something, while acting in accordance with the common sense, decided to withdraw and by undertaking certain definite steps ultimately suffered a loss, whereas withdrawal on the part of the person making a promise would be unjustified. The author of the paper made an effort to try to answer the question whether the abuse of right clause mentioned in Art. 5 of the Civil Code may be regarded as the Polish equivalent of promissory estoppel.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

47

Milne, Patrick. "Proprietary Estoppel and the Element of Unconscionable Conduct." Cambridge Law Journal 56, no. 1 (March 1997): 34–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197300017669.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

48

Cartwright, John. "Extinguishment of Obligations by Estoppel: “High Trees” Again." Cambridge Law Journal 49, no. 1 (March 1990): 13–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197300106762.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

49

Piška, Nick. "Hopes, Expectations and Revocable Promises in Proprietary Estoppel." Modern Law Review 72, no. 6 (November 2009): 998–1015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2009.00778.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

50

Reid, Elspeth. "Personal Bar: Case-Law in Search of Principle." Edinburgh Law Review 7, no. 3 (September 2003): 340–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/elr.2003.7.3.340.

Full text

Abstract:

Like the law of estoppel, its broad equivalent in Common Law jurisdictions, the law of personal bar in Scotland has an extensive case-law but an uncertain conceptual structure. This article draws upon that case-law to offer the framework of analysis for a unitary doctrine in which the central focus is the assessment of unfairness. The framework invites a reappraisal of the traditional terminological divisions within personal bar in order to identify indicators of unfairness specific to the particular context in question.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!