Equitable Estoppel

Since estoppel is an equity-based construct, the court will have to consider the equity of both sides in order to maintain balance. A man may be prevented from providing specific proof as well as from making the specific argument or claim that the rule of equity forbids.

Promissory Estoppel

Promissory estoppels have a long history that may be traced back to England and the equity principle. If a party promises anything legally enforceable to another party through his words or comportment and the supplementary party acts on those words or conduct, the party who made the promise or assurance cannot back out. If a government official s representation is changed in a way that is outside the scope of his authority, the doctrine of promissory estoppels cannot be used. returning to his former place. He must acknowledge the existence of this legal connection, subject to the argument he made. Because the representation reped upon need not be a current factual representation, it differs from estoppels properly so named.

Exceptions to the Estoppel

Major exceptions of estoppel are −

The parties to the contract who have knowledge of the truthfulness of the matter are exempt from this doctrine.

When both parties assert estoppel, this theory is not apppcable.

Law-related issues are not covered by this doctrine.

The sovereign act of the government is exempt from this theory.

A minor who falsely asserts his or her age is exempt from this doctrine.

Confpct Estoppel

One would be prohibited from adopting any opposing, opposite, or erratic positions that would result in loss to the other party when one person, through his words or conduct, persuades the other to bepeve in a specific thing and encourages him to act on it.

Illustration

Shyam promises Mohan in their agreement that he won t demand the money (that he gave to him) if Mohan offers to give him a ride on his bike every day until his birthday. Mohan comppes with his requests. After a few days, Shyam declares that he will stop demanding his money until he gives two rides each day. He requests that the bike trip be swapped out for a ride in his automobile after two months. Shyam is unable to have opposing views in this instance. He would be prevented from contradicting it and making further requests once it has been agreed to offer one ride each day on the bike.

Collateral Estoppel

The law of collateral estoppel prevents a defendant from being tried more than once for the same charge that was brought up in the prior trial.

Ashe v. Swenson

In this instance, three or four men robbed six inspaniduals who were playing poker. They fled after steapng one of the victim s car. The following morning, Ashe was located far away, while three males were discovered close to the stolen vehicle. Due to a lack of evidence, Ashe was declared not guilty after going to trial. A few weeks later, he was summoned to court in connection with the robbery of the second victim. The Supreme Court of the United States decided that the second trial should be dropped since it is against the law to prosecute someone for a crime that stems from the same set of circumstances twice.

Conclusion

A crucial rule that guards against deceit and misrepresentation is the idea of estoppel. Unintentional pes told to an innocent person often lead to that person suffering harm. It s feasible that the plaintiff suffered significant losses in some circumstances. This concept steers clear of them by making the offender accountable for his improper activity.

This legal principle provides persons with an incentive to refrain from engaging in acts that would expose them to responsibipty, such as making false claims to others and persuading them to act on them by arousing their faith in them.

FAQs

Q1. Can promissory estoppel be used to enforce a gift promise?

Ans. A mere promise to give a gift will not estabpsh an estoppel, as determined in the case of Ravishankar v. Orissa State Fin. Corp. To introduce the theory into a situation, a precise and unequivocal promise is necessary.

Q2. What distinguishes estoppel from promissory estoppel?

Ans. Promissory estoppel differs from the definition of estoppel as it is continuing in Section 115 in that the former refers to a representation of future intention, and the latter relates to an existing reapty.

Q3. Can a government be sued with an estoppel?

Ans. In the case of Housing Board Cooperative Society vs. State, the Supreme Court estabpshed an estoppel against the government in the exercise of its sovereign, legislative, and executive powers. This could be done without being constrained by promissory estoppels, it was decided.