3.5 Principle of Estoppel

The inconsistency's bar: the party who asserted (or accepted) a state of affairs cannot deny it to the other's detriment — the classic definition: the rule of evidence which precludes a person from denying the truth of some statement formerly made by himself. The elements: (i) the representation (the statement or conduct — the position taken); (ii) the other's reliance (the belief-and-action upon it); (iii) the detriment (the change of position on the faith of it). The kinds: the promissory estoppel (the promise's bar against the promisor); the equitable; the estoppel by record (the judgment's preclusion) and by deed. The law's faces: the Evidence Act's estoppel provisions; the Civil Code 2074's general-equity interfaces. The limits: no estoppel against the statute (the law's operation cannot be waived by conduct); no estoppel founded on fraud or illegality; the representation's truth — not the lie — is what the law enforces. Exam Focus Long questions: (i) The five principles — each stated with its logic and an illustration (the unit IS the question); (ii) The hearsay rule with the exceptions; (iii) The estoppel's elements, kinds and limits. Short questions: best-evidence rule; res gestae's kinship with the hearsay exception; the presumption of innocence's evidentiary face; promissory estoppel. Trick areas: (i) The hearsay statement offered NOT for its truth is not hearsay (the statement proving…