Contract Law: Promissory Estoppel, Certainty, and Recent Developments

This report delves into key aspects of Contract Law, specifically focusing on Promissory Estoppel and Certainty. It examines the principles of promissory estoppel, including requirements, limitations, and rights, alongside recent developments in case law such as James vs James and Moore vs Moore. The report also analyzes the concept of certainty in contractual agreements, referencing the case of Scammell v Ouston and exploring how courts provide meaning to incomplete contracts. Furthermore, it discusses recent developments in UK law regarding smart contracts and cryptoassets, highlighting their impact on legal certainty. The report references relevant legal articles and online resources to support its analysis, providing a comprehensive overview of these important areas of contract law.

CONTRACT LAW

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Unit 5 Promissory Estoppel.............................................................................................................1
Part payment at common law and in equity.................................................................................1
Limitations / Requirements for Operation of Promissory Estoppel.............................................1
Rights under Promissory Estoppel...............................................................................................1
Recent Development in this area.................................................................................................1
Unit 6 Certainty ...............................................................................................................................2
Certainty in Offer and Acceptance established in Scammell v Ouston......................................2
Recent developments in the area of Law.....................................................................................2
Courts provide meaning to an incomplete contract.....................................................................2
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................3

Unit 5 Promissory Estoppel
Part payment at common law and in equity
The pat payment rule says if the receiver of the goods or services in parts, this cannot be
used for satisfying the entire sum which is due. General rule under law states that payment of
lesser sum will not be discharging the obligation for payment of full amount (Baird, 2019). There
are case given related to part payment considerations.
Limitations / Requirements for Operation of Promissory Estoppel.
Requirement of Promissory Estoppel
 Promisor to make significant promise for causing the promisee to perform the promise.
 Promisee must have relied over the promise.
 Significant damages were suffered by promisee relying on promise.
 Fulfilment of promise to compensate promisee.
Limitations
 Lawyers love metaphors
 Estoppel as either mine layer or mine sweeper, it could never be capital units.
 It should be used as shield not as sword.
Rights under Promissory Estoppel.
It gives the sufferer the right to claim damages that have suffered by promisor or
promisee. There are certain requirements to be fulfilled for claims like the economic loss have
been suffered due to non performance of the promise by the promisee (Harris, 2018).
Recent Development in this area.
With two of the claims of 2018 that are James vs James[2018] and Moore vs Moore
[2018]. Recent cases provides for the importance of proprietary estoppel. Three principles in
proprietary estoppel are much clear and are providing clear base for identifying potential
strengths and weaknesses of potential claims.
1

Unit 6 Certainty
Certainty in Offer and Acceptance established in Scammell v Ouston
Contractual agreements are analysed on offer and acceptance. Offeror has to make an
offer that will be accepted by offeree will create a binding contract. For amounting to offer it
should be shown that offeror had intention of binding the offeree.
In the case of Scammel vs Ouston it was held by the court that terms of agreement do no
have any certainty. Agreement was there on price and not over terms relating HP stating whether
it will be monthly or weekly instalments or the amount of instalments (Steele, 2018). Contract
was unenforceable as terms of hire purchase were not clearly stated.
Recent developments in the area of Law.
UK has charged ahead with the legal certainty related to smart contracts and for crypto-
assets (Fletcher and Spargo, 2016). Step is significant for recognising legality of smart contracts
and trade of crypto-assets in UK. It will avoid the barrier in adoption.
Courts provide meaning to an incomplete contract.
Court of Appeal held that contract is binding if offer is accepted and parties have agreed
over the essential terms of contract. The intention of the parties should create legal relation
between themselves involving considerations (Incomplete Contracts, 2019). Unless all the terms
have been agreed the contract would be incomplete and not binding.
2

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Baird, D.G., 2019. Unlikely Resurrection: Richard Posner, Promissory Estoppel, and The Death
of Contract. U. Chi. L. Rev.. 86. p.1037.
Harris, A.P., 2018. The Doctrine of Promissory Estoppel in an Arm's Length Commercial
Transaction in Tennessee: A Primer. U. Mem. L. Rev.. 49. p.813.
Steele, J., 2018. Offshore Drilling: Combating Regulatory Uncertainty with Contract Law
Protection. Brook. J. Corp. Fin. & Com. L.. 13. p.515.
Fletcher, T. and Spargo, P., 2016. Uncertainty and risk: contract law. Without Prejudice. 16(6).
pp.20-21.
Online
Incomplete Contracts. 2019.[Online]. Available through :
<https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=1aaf64be-85ff-460d-adc0-b219e1d17fa8>.
3