Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd
[1947] KB 130
Ratio Decidendi
Where a party makes a promise not to enforce their strict legal rights, and the other party relies on that promise, the promisor may be estopped from going back on their promise. This is promissory estoppel — it is a shield, not a sword (it cannot create new causes of action).
Fapte
In 1937, High Trees took a 99-year lease of a block of flats at £2,500 per year. During World War II, many flats were empty due to evacuations. Central London agreed to reduce the rent to £1,250. After the war, Central London sought to recover the full rent retrospectively.
Rezumatul hotărârii
Denning J held that the promise to reduce rent was binding during the wartime period and Central London was estopped from claiming the full rent for that period. However, once the conditions had changed (the war ended), the full rent became payable again. Denning applied the principle from Hughes v Metropolitan Railway Co [1877].
Citate cheie
"A promise intended to be binding, intended to be acted on, and in fact acted on, is binding so far as its terms properly apply."
— Denning J
Tratament ulterior
The leading authority on promissory estoppel. Qualified: it is a shield, not a sword — it cannot found an independent cause of action (Combe v Combe [1951]).