100% (1)
Pages:
1 pages/≈275 words
Sources:
2
Style:
APA
Subject:
Business & Marketing
Type:
Essay
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 4.32
Topic:

Business law: doctrine act

Essay Instructions:
Research the doctrine of promissory estoppel online. Use an actual case to help you discuss the following questions: - How does this doctrine act as an exception to the elements and requirements of a contract? - Why does this doctrine exist? - Did the court reach the proper decision in the case you discussed? Your answer should be about 300 words
Essay Sample Content Preview:

Business Law: The Doctrine of Promissory Estoppels
Name:
Course:
Professor Name:
(November 16, 2011)
Business Law: The doctrine of promissory estoppels
Estoppels are a doctrine that may be applied in definite situations so as to avoid a person relying on certain facts or rights that are different from facts stated prior to the event. In this doctrine a non contractual promise which lacks consideration is enforced so as to achieve justice. When justice is enforced by means of enforcing a promise, then it is promissory estoppels, especially when party is heavily relying on the promise. Whereas a contract must be legally enforced promise where there is trust and cooperation of all parties and must be signed and agreed upon (Blum, 2007).
The elements of a contract include an offer, acceptance and a value of exchange or consideration which are subject to the court’s interpretation. A contract is voluntarily signed and voidable if terms are faulted; it is also illegal if it violates public policies or is based on illegal facts (Boyer, 2009). If the contract is oral then enforcing it in a court of law will be difficult but promissory estoppels are easy to enforce since facts are provided and hence it is exceptional.
An example of a case is the McIntosh v. Murphy case; where Murphy (defendant) had given McIntosh (Plaintiff) a verbal promise to hire him as a driver for a year, but, after two months the plaintiff was fired despite sacrificing to travel from Hawaii (“McIntosh v. Murphy”, 1970). The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff for the reason that he had relied on the defendants promise and had already worked for the defendant for some time.
In a contract both sides have their contribution where an amicable deal is agreed upon; whereas in estoppels one party gives a promise which may not necessarily agreed upon. In this case it acts as an exception to a contract as the plaintiff relies on the promise and did not signed a working contract but presented facts that would support his decision for the ...
Updated on
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:
Sign In
Not register? Register Now!