What is an example of detrimental reliance?

For example, if the toys would have sold for $100,000, then you would be entitled to receive that amount in damages. In a detrimental reliance case, however, you can only recover reliance damages — the amount actually expended in reliance, which is the cost of manufacturing the shipment of toys ($50,000).

Is detrimental reliance consideration?

Detrimental reliance must be shown to involve reliance that is reasonable, which is a determination made on an individual case-by-case basis, taking all factors into consideration. Detrimental means that some type of harm is suffered.

What is the difference between promissory estoppel and detrimental reliance?

The key difference is that the promise in PE was not conditioned upon performance or reliance. The detrimental reliance was undertaken by the promisee but not at the behest of the promisor. Promissory estoppel helps injured parties to recover on promises made that have led to economic loss when not met.

What is the reliance theory?

1.7.3 Reliance theory. According to this theory as it is applied in the context of dissensus, a contract is based on the intention of one party to an agreement and the reasonable impression or reliance on his part that the other party had the same intention.

How can I prove my reliance damages?

Reliance damages are calculated by asking what it would take to restore the injured party to the economic position occupied before the party acted in reasonable reliance on the promise. Reliance damages may be awarded after a breach of contract or by way of promissory estoppel.

What is meant by estoppel?

Estoppel is a legal principle that prevents someone from arguing something or asserting a right that contradicts what they previously said or agreed to by law. It is meant to prevent people from being unjustly wronged by the inconsistencies of another person’s words or actions.

What is the rule for promissory estoppel?

Overview. Within contract law, promissory estoppel refers to the doctrine that a party may recover on the basis of a promise made when the party’s reliance on that promise was reasonable, and the party attempting to recover detrimentally relied on the promise.