Abstract
From Re Stringer (1877) to Peekay Intermark Ltd v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd (2006) , the contractual estoppel has consistently held parties to contractual terms, including the assumed state of affairs. Against wider thinking that there is no theoretical basis to contractual estoppel, this article argues, by examining relevant case law, that voluntary undertaking or mutual assent of the parties best espouses the underlying principle that prevents either parties from asserting different facts. © 2022 Sweet & Maxwell and its Contributors.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 208-218 |
| Number of pages | 11 |
| Journal | Journal of International Banking Law and Regulation |
| Volume | 38 |
| Issue number | 6 |
| Publication status | Published - Jun 2023 |
Research Keywords
- Consent
- Contract terms
- Contractual estoppel
- Financial services
- Jurisprudence
- Undertakings