Estoppel contracts
In very broad terms, 'estoppel' prevents a party from asserting a claim or right that contradicts something they have previously said or done, or something that has been legally established to be true.
The courts have held that in the absence of the essentials of a contract (namely; two or more parties, an intention to create legal relations, an agreement and consideration), a contract could still come into existence between parties if they have so conducted themselves as to a common assumption, in fact or law, that there is a contract and that it would be wrong or unreasonable for the parties thereafter to deny the existence of such a contract.
Estoppel contracts have received a mixed reception from the courts, finding favour in G. Percy Trentham v Architral Luxfer, and in Mitsui Babock Energy Ltd v John Brown Engineering Ltd, but being rejected in J. Murphy & Sons Ltd v ABB Daimler Benz.
[edit] Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki:
Featured articles
Check out some of the best features and news from Designing Buildings as well as key stories from around the web.
Historic England publishes research into embodied carbon when retrofitting traditional buildings.
New Prime Minister delivers on ECA call for cut in electricity costs.
CIOB reacts to the announcement of Andy Burnham as Prime Minister.
Heritage and conservation science workforce survey - Have your say.
England's Suburbs 1820-2020. Book review.
New, more proportionate and targeted approach for higher-risk building assessments.
Government brings British Steel into public ownership.
UKCW Birmingham returns with bold new theme and focus.
New guidance published on competence requirements for self-certification schemes.
Construction Management, 8 July
NEETs crisis drives interest in trades, but apprenticeships barriers remain.
Passive fire protection webinar
MEP services penetration seals.
Where its at podcast (and video) - The role of the Architectural Technologist as an Expert Witness.