Question

10. Sammy entered into an oral contract with Macaulay for the sale of goods amounting to $900. Sammy paid the amount, but Macaulay refused to deliver the goods. Sammy suffered serious losses because of Macaulay's breach of contract. Sammy sued Macaulay. Macaulay alleged the statute of frauds as a defense. Under which principle is Sammy protected as an exception to the statute of frauds? A. Tortious liability B. Vicarious liability C. Part performance D. Promissory estoppel

Answer 1

Dear Student

Promissory Estoppel simply empower the either party against breach of a promise by any party in contract. In simple words promise can be enforced by law if the any person is suffering losses due to non-fulfilment of promise by other person in the contract.

In our case Sammy and Macaulay entered into a verbal contract for sale of goods. Sammy fulfilled his part by paying the amount to Macaulay but Macaulay denied to deliver the goods and hence Sammy suffered the losses. Here Macaulay did not fulfilled his promise and hence the Sammy suffered the losses due to non-fulfilment of promise by Macaulay.

Considering the above provision and facts related to the question Sammy is protected by “Promissory Estoppel” and can use it in court of law against "Statute of Frauds" alleged by Macaulay.

Hope this helps

Regards