Estoppel in evidence law pdf. Doctrine of Estoppel 2022-12-16
Estoppel in evidence law pdf Rating:
8,7/10
599
reviews
Estoppel in evidence law refers to a legal principle that prevents a person from denying or contradicting a statement or action that has previously been made or taken. This principle is used in court proceedings to prevent a party from relying on evidence that is inconsistent with their previous statements or actions.
There are several types of estoppel that may be used in evidence law, including estoppel by representation, estoppel by convention, and estoppel by record.
Estoppel by representation occurs when a person makes a representation or statement to another person, and the other person relies on that representation in some way. For example, if a seller tells a buyer that a product is in good condition and the buyer purchases the product based on this representation, the seller may be estopped from later denying the statement or arguing that the product was not actually in good condition.
Estoppel by convention occurs when two parties have a mutual understanding or agreement, and one party relies on that understanding or agreement to their detriment. For example, if two parties agree to settle a dispute through mediation and one party relies on this agreement by not pursuing further legal action, the other party may be estopped from later denying the agreement and pursuing legal action.
Estoppel by record occurs when a person takes a position in a legal proceeding, and that position is later inconsistent with their later statements or actions. For example, if a person testifies in a court case and later contradicts their testimony in a different proceeding, they may be estopped from relying on the later contradictory statements.
In all cases, the purpose of estoppel is to prevent parties from making inconsistent statements or taking inconsistent actions in order to mislead or deceive others. It is an important principle in the legal system because it promotes fairness and honesty in legal proceedings.
Overall, estoppel is a legal principle that is used to prevent parties from denying or contradicting previous statements or actions in order to promote fairness and honesty in legal proceedings. It is an important tool in the legal system and can have significant consequences for parties who attempt to rely on inconsistent evidence.
EVIDENCE 1.8 ESTOPPEL
Further, the Section also explains that a person who came upon an immovable property by the license cannot deny the fact that the person from whom he got the license, that is, in whose possession the immovable property, had the title at the time when he got his license. It would require a clear and unequivocal promise to import the doctrine into a matter. The rule of estoppel looks into the aspects of equity, justice and good conscience. Held; he was estopped from reopening the matter. Also in Olukoga V Fatunde, the court noted that the previous litigation was in relation to compensation over land and the second was in relation to declaration of title over the same land.
Specific Instances of Estoppel 1. A third party should not acquire an interest in the subject matter. The Doctrine of Estoppel is an rule of evidence. In Jimoh V Akande, the court noted that the plea of estoppel per rem judicatam must first be made by the defendant before he will be permitted to raise it. These features make it even clearer that the page 97 note 2 It may be added also that estoppel by record is a doctrine of common law, as distinct from equity. While, Section 115 contains the general principle of estoppel by conduct, Section 116 and 117 are instances of estoppel by contract. A REVIEW OF PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL LAW IN MICHIGAN by Lee Hornberger This article reviews Michigan promissory estoppel law, including the development of promissory estoppel, the present law, and specific applications.
14. THE DOCTRINE OF ESTOPPEL IN THE LAW OF typemoon.org
Further, in Ukaegbu V Ugoji adopting Yoye V Olubode it was noted that res judicata operates not only against the party whom it affects but also against the jurisdiction of the court itself. In Udofe V Aquaisua, the previous judgment of a Native Court obtained in the absence of the other party without evidence being called in support of the claim was held to be a nullity incapable of creating estoppel. Therefore we are to look at the pleadings of the parties to determine issues raised Hill V Hill Where the wife petitioned the court for divorce on the ground of cruelty, the court held that the ground was frivolous. Standing by may be applied to the family as in Clay Industries V Aina, the court held that the family should apply to be joined. Estoppels which are not covered by the Evidence Act may be termed equitable estoppels. Equitable estoppel, where successfully made, generally results in the law holding a promisor the person making the promise to his promise so as to prevent detriment to the person relying on the promise.
(DOC) WHAT IS MEANT BY ESTOPPEL IN EVIDENCE LAW and Others.
It also includes a person who knowingly stood by to watch his battle being fought by another. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. In Marbell V Akwei and Akwei V Cofie the courts noted that in such a situation, the person who stood by is bound by the result of the suit and is estopped from re-opening the issue determined in it. ESTOPPEL IN THE AUSTRALIAN LAW SYSTEM PART VIII E Jaani. The land afterwards becomes the property of A, and A seeks to set aside the sale on the ground that, at the time of the sale, he had no title.
Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. Conclusion Introduction Section 115of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 provides with the meaning of estoppel as when one person either by his act or omission, or by declaration, has made another person believe something to be true and persuaded that person to act upon it, then in no case can he or his representative deny the truth of that thing later in the suit or in the proceedings. The same applies between the licensee and licensor. Therefore, if A knew the true facts, no estoppel arises. In the case of B.
Res judicata has been recognized by the law as a legal procedure. For example, if X has made a false representation to Y and planting his faith in it, Y has acted upon the representation, then only he can claim the plea of the doctrine of estoppel. Promissory Estoppel- It has originated as an exception to consideration in the field of contract law. The university was held to have become bound by estoppel, wavier and acquaintance. Estoppel… A shield or sword? Fraud or collusion vitiates the judgment- Girdlestone V Brighton Aqurium. It is a well founded principle and accordingly this paper will be from a accused perspective.
(PDF) The doctrine of estoppel under Indian Evidence Law
This legal principle gives an incentive to every one of those people who tries to make false representations to other and induces them to act upon it by planting their faith in them, and incur losses as a result of such false representations, by not performing such acts, else they would be held liable. It is one on which the other side has acted to its prejudice. It should be noted that an appeal is considered to be the continuation of the same case and thus it will not come under the principle of Res-judicata. Promissory estoppel has been dealt in the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Estoppel has some similarity to an irrebuttable presumption of law, and has been so treated for one of its effects is to prevent the rebuttal of facts alleged by the other party. In Bankole V Pelu, the defendant was sued in his personal capacity in the former suit and in the present suit, he was appearing in a representative capacity. It cannot also remove the condition of statues.
Representations under Section 115 should be of facts, not of law or opinion. But the whole concept is more carefully viewed as a rule of substantive law. Case Laws Life Insurance Corporation v. Further, the Section also explains that a person who came upon an immovable property by the license cannot deny the fact that the person from whom he got the license, that is, in whose possession the immovable property, had the title at the time when he got his license. As a rule of evidence, the doctrine of estoppel as laid down in Section 115 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, owes its origin from the law in England. Krishna Pradhan Moti Lal v. Even though estoppel is described as a rule of evidence but in certain cases, it may have the effect of creating substantive right against the person who is estopped.
