White SW Computer Law
Intellectual Property, Information Technology & Telecommunications Lawyers
Melbourne Office - PO Box 452, COLLINS STREET WEST Victoria 8007 Australia
Sydney Office - GPO Box 2506, SYDNEY New South Wales 2001 Australia
Telephone: Melbourne Office - +61 3 9629 3709 Sydney Office - +61 2 9233 2600
Facsimile: Melbourne Office - +61 3 9629 3217 Sydney Office - +61 2 9233 3044
Email: wcl@computerlaw.com.au Internet: http://www.computerlaw.com.au

User Tools

Site Tools


representations

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
representations [2011/06/26 12:06]
steve
representations [2017/07/30 18:03] (current)
Line 6: Line 6:
 This webpage looks common law misrepresentation and estoppel. This webpage looks common law misrepresentation and estoppel.
  
-====== Cases ====== +===== Cases ===== 
-====== 1990 ======+==== 1990 ====
   * **Waltons Stores (Interstate) Pty Ltd v Maher(([1988] HCA 7))**   * **Waltons Stores (Interstate) Pty Ltd v Maher(([1988] HCA 7))**
     * Mason CJ and Wilson J said the doctrine of promissory estoppel     * Mason CJ and Wilson J said the doctrine of promissory estoppel
Line 23: Line 23:
         - the plaintiff’s action or inaction will occasion detriment if the assumption or expectation is not fulfilled; and         - the plaintiff’s action or inaction will occasion detriment if the assumption or expectation is not fulfilled; and
         - the defendant has failed to act to avoid that detriment whether by fulfilling the assumption or expectation or otherwise]         - the defendant has failed to act to avoid that detriment whether by fulfilling the assumption or expectation or otherwise]
-====== 1989 ======+==== 1989 ====
   * Austotel Pty Ltd v Franklins Selfserve Pty Ltd((1989) 16 NSWLR 582 at 610))   * Austotel Pty Ltd v Franklins Selfserve Pty Ltd((1989) 16 NSWLR 582 at 610))
 +    * Priestley JA said for equitable estoppel to operate there must be the creation or encouragement by the defendant in the plaintiff of an assumption that a contract will come into existence or a promise be performed or an interest granted to the plaintiff by the defendant, and reliance on that by the plaintiff, in circumstances where departure from the assumption by the defendant would be unconscionable

  © White SW Computer Law 1994-2019. ABN 94 669 684 644. All Rights Reserved.
  Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation
  This website is a guide only and should not be used as a substitute for proper legal advice.
  Readers should make their own enquiries and seek appropriate legal advice.
  For legal advice please email wcl@computerlaw.com.au