Doctrine of Estoppel

What is Estoppel in Law of Evidence

Overview:

A man should not be allowed to contradict, by his words or conduct, what he has previously asserted and this principle is known as estoppel.

Estoppel is based on the principle that it would be most inequitable and unjust that if one person by a representation made,has induced another to act as he would not otherwise have done, the person who made the representation should not be allowed to deny or repudiate the effect of his former statement to the loss and injury of the person who acted on it.

According to Bentham, Stephen, Taylor: “the doctrine of estoppels is based on equitable doctrine, and is a rule of exclusion, which appeals that if a person has by act or omission altered his position, he will be estopped and he is precluded or debarred from denying it or take a position, so as to alter his position to the detriment of the other person, the opposite party."

Interpretation of Term Estoppel:

According to Oxford Dictionary of Law [from Norman French estouper ,to stop up] “A rule of evidence or a rule of law that prevents a person from denying the truth of statement he has made or rom denying the existence of facts that he has alleged to exist.

Meaning of Estoppel:

The word “Estoppels” is an ancient English word which has been derived from an old French word “Estoupail” which means to stop or to hinder. The term “estoppels” has been defined by various authors in different ways. But in a general sense it indicates that a man should not be allowed to contradict, by his words or conduct, what he has previously asserted. In order to bring the case within the ambit of law of estoppels, some essential requirements and certain conditions must be fulfilled.

Definitions of Estoppel:

(i) According to Black’s Law Dictionary:

“Estoppel is a bar that prevents one from asserting a claim or right that contradicts what one has said or done before or what has been legally established as true.”

(ii) According to Halsbury’s Law of England:

“Estoppel may be defined as a disability whereby a party is precluded from alleging or proving in legal proceedings that a fact is otherwise than it has been made to appear by the matter giving rise to that disability.”

(iii) According to Article 114 of Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984 (Evidence Act):

“When one person has, by his declaration, act or omission, intentionally caused or permitted another person to believe a thing to be true and to act upon such belief, neither he nor his representative shall be allowed, in any suit or proceeding between himself and such person on his representative, to deny the truth of that thing.”

(vi) According to Justice Munir:

Estoppel is a rule of evidence whereby a person is prevented from denying or asserting a fact contrary to his previous statements.

(v) According to Phipson:

An estoppel is a rule whereby a party is precluded from denying the existence of some state of facts which he has previously asserted”.

(vi) 2021 MLD 837

Estoppel is a doctrine of law which precludes a person from denying the truth of statement formally made by him.

Illustration:

(i) A intentionally and falsely leads B to believe that certain land belongs to A and thereby induces B to buy and pay for it. The land afterwards becomes the property of A, and A seeks to set aside the sale on the ground that at the time of sale he had no title. He must not be allowed to prove his stance (want of title).
(ii) If a person knowingly does not come forward for ejectment of the illegal occupant within the limitation, he cannot succeed beyond limitation and would not be in position to cross the legal estoppel. [2021 PLD 429 LAHORE]

RELEVANT PROVISIONS:

Following are relevant provisions related to topic:

Articles 54 to 58 and 114 to 116 of Q.S.O. 1984. Sections 115 to 117 in Old evidence Act.

Essential Elements of Estoppel:

(i) Representation: There must be a representation by a person or his authorised agent to another in any form, declaration, act or omission.
(ii) Representation of Existence of Facts:The representation must have been of the existence of facts and not promises or intention which might or not be enforceable in contract.
(iii) Belief By the Other Party:There must have been belief on the part of the other party in its truth.
(iv) Intention: The representation must have been meant to be relied upon.
(v) Action on Belief: There must have been action on the faith of the declaration, act or omission by the other party.
(vi) Unawareness of True State of Things: The person claiming the belief of an Estoppel must show that he was not aware of the true state of things.

Three conditions are required to be established in order to attract the principle of estoppel

(i) a representation by a person to another,
(ii) the other should have acted upon that representation, and
(iii) such action should have been detrimental to the interests of the person to whom the representation has been made

Even if one of the conditions is not satisfied the doctrine of estoppel cannot be applied. [2021 CLC 1461]

PLEA OF ESTOPPEL:

Only the person to whom representation was made for when it was designed can avail himself of it. A person is entitled to plead estoppel in his own individual character and not as a representative or his assignee.

Kinds Or Types of Estoppel:

Coke has classified estoppel into following three kinds:

(i) By matter record or judgment.
(i) By deed.
(iii) By matter in Bias or conduct.

(i) Estoppel By Record or Judgment:

If court has passed judgment about some dispute between parties after complete hearing of both parties or their representatives shall remain bound to such judgment and no litigation shall be instituted in future about the same dispute between these parties. in other words Where a final judicial decision has been pronounced by a judicial tribunal of competent Jurisdiction over the parties to and the subject matter of the litigation, any party or privy to such litigation or any person, in the case of decision in rem is estopped in any subsequent litigation from disputing or questioning such decision on the merits.

Issue Estoppel:

Issue estoppel represents an extension of the doctrine of res-judicata to include a bar on the Subsequent litigation not only of all decided issues whose resolution was essential to the determination of earlier proceedings, but also to every Point which properly belong to the Subject of litigation.

(ii) Estoppel By Deed:

It rests on the principle that when a person has entered into solemn engagement by deed under seal with another party, he or the person claiming through or under him shall not be allowed to setup the contrary of his assertion in the deed. e.g. written contracts, gift, divorce etc.
In England: The parties to the sale deed are precluded from its force and effect i.e. from disputing their own solemn deed.
In Pakistan: The doctrine of estoppel by deed does not strictly exist because a deed under a seal is not treated with particular favor any more than a simple contract.

Exceptions to the Estoppel By Deed:

Following are exceptions to the rule of estoppel by deed.

(a) Not bind the third party: it only binds the parties and privies and not the third party to the deed.
(b) Not apply to collateral matters: It is applicable only in actions on the deed. It does not apply to actions on collateral matters even between the same parties.
(c) Where Deed is obtained by fraud: There is no estoppel where the deed is obtained by fraud or illegality.
(d) Estoppel not extends to description: The estoppel does not extend to the description or immaterial part of the deed, e.g, the date of the document, the quantity or nature of land etc.
(e) Deed which can take effect by interest: A deed which can take effect by interest shall not be construed to take effect by estoppel.

(iii) Estoppel By Conduct or Estoppel in Bais :

Estoppel in bias is now known as estoppel by conduct or representation which is the subject matter of Article 114. In this case a person must by his conduct induce another to do an act on the basis of his conduct. It may arise from:

(i) A contract or agreement
(ii) Apart from contract e.g. misrepresentation, negligence etc.

When some person admits any incident true and makes such admission through conduct, attitude, act or character shall be prohibited from deviating from such admission.
Party is estopped by his own conduct if he knowingly allows any person to cause damage to his right leading to inference that such happening was in true direction. [2021 PLD 429 LAHORE]

Basis of Article 114 or Estoppel By Conduct:

Article 114 or Estoppel By Conduct is founded upon doctrine laid down in the following case:

"Pickard vs Sears (1837)" “that where a person by his words or conduct willfully causes another to believe the existence ‘of a certain state of things, and induces him to act on that belief so as to alter his own previous position, the former is precluded from averring against the latter a different state of things existing at the same time.

(iv) Estoppel by Representation:

When representation is by statement or by conduct and it purports to affirm, deny or describe any existing fact, such representation amounts to Estoppel and this Estoppel is called Estoppel by representation.

(v) Estoppel By Waiver:

If some person abandons his/her non-vested right by express declaration or conduct, shall be prevented from asserting such non-vested right.

Where a person, in spite of having full knowledge of violation of any of his rights of personal nature, remains silent and does not take any measure for safeguarding same then such person is deemed to have impliedly waived his right. [2002 CLC 166]

(vi) Acquiescence and Estoppel:

When some person gives a legal warning to another person and this warning is based on some asserted facts, by this other person does not respond within reasonable period of time, then this another person is generally considered to have lost legal right to assert the contrary. Acquiescence is a species of estoppel, estoppel arises where the party aware of his rights sees other parties acting upon the mistaken notion of his rights. Injury accruing from one's acquiesces in another's action to his prejudice creates estoppel. [2022 CLC 873]
If a party against whom the acquiescence and estoppel is pleaded was aware about the dents pointed out by the other party and even then it participated in the process without raising any objection then in case of adverse order, such party cannot take inconsistent position.

[2021 YLR 2337]

(vii) Promissory Estoppel:

Where Government controlled functionaries made a promise which ensued a right to anyone who believed in it and acted under the same, then such functionaries were precluded from acting detrimental to the rights of such person/citizen. [2021 CLD 370 SUPREME COURT]

Important Rules Relating To Estoppel:

(i) The rule of estoppel is based on equity and good conscience.
(ii) Estoppel deals with questions of fact and not of rights.
(iii) It can be used as a weapon of defense.
(iv) The plea of estoppel is not available in matters of waiver of rights.
(v) The object of estoppel is to prevent fraud and secure justice between parties of promotion of honesty and good faith.
(vi) It is distinguish from res-judicata.
(vil) It is both a rule of pleading and evidence.
(viii) It merely operates as a bar to suit; it does not extinguish the right.

PROOF OF ESTOPPEL:

Party in order to prove estoppel, has to do more than to show that it has acted to its detriment and to the knowledge of the other party in the hope that the other party would not withdraw from the agreement in principle. It also has to show that the other party had created or encouraged a belief or expectation that he would not withdraw and the party seeking to find estoppel had relied on that belief or expectation. [2002 CLD 218]

Where Rule of Estoppel Does not Apply:

Following are the cases where the rule of estoppel does not apply.

(i) On point of law: There is no estoppel on a point of law. Though acquiescence is a specie of estoppel but there can be no estoppel against law. [2022 CLC 880]
(ii) Against statute: The principle of estoppel cannot be invoked to defeat the plain provisions of a statute. There is no estoppel against the act of legislature. [1996 MLD 144]
(iii) On questions of rights: Estoppel deals with questions of fact and not with questions of right.
(iv) Against the constitution: Rule of estoppel cannot defeat the provisions of the constitution.
(v) In criminal cases: Rule of estoppel does not apply in criminal cases.
(vi) Against jurisdiction of court: no estoppel operates against jurisdiction of the court. [PLD 1974 Quetta 21]
(vii) legal disability: there can be no estoppel where a person by representation creates a state of things which he is under a legal disability from creating.

Characteristics of Estoppel:

(i) CERTAINTY: Estoppel must be certain. It should clearly refer to the representation, on which it may be founded,
(ii) OPERATION: Estoppel by itself neither creates title, nor extinguishes the right. It merely operates as an impediment to litigation.
(iii) RULE OF CIVIL ACTION: Estoppel is a rule of civil actions; it has no application to criminal proceedings.
(IV) Estoppel cannot circumvent the law.

CONCLUSION:

We may conclude that the rule of Estoppel is basically a rule of evidence and is based on equity and good conscience. It precludes a person from denying the truth of some statement previously made by himself. No cause of action arises upon Estoppel itself.

Relevant Questions:

What do you understand by the term estoppel?

On what principle of law, estoppel is based?

What are its necessary Ingredients?

Read also:

Highly accomplished, meticulously organized, and detailed Attorney with a proven track record of success in conducting legal research, analysis, trial preparation, and document drafting.

The Law Studies