CONTRACT LAW

In January, Aristisdis took over some city center property with th intention of converting it into an art gallery. Because the property was in need of repair, Aristisdis entered into two contracts. The first was with Varvara to do all the necessary repair work and the second was with costas to do all the necessary paint work. Both contracts were for $5000 and both workers were paid $1000 immediately. It was a term of both contracts that the work was to be finished by the end of March because Aristidis had an art exhibition planned for May 1.

At the end of February, Varvara told Aristidis that she would not be able to complete the repairs in time unless Aristii\dis agreed to pay an additional $1000. Aristidis agreed and then thought that it wouldn’t be fair on Costas so Aristidis promised to pay Costas an additional $1000 too.

On completion of the work at the end of march, Aristidis is now refusing to pay either of the workers the additional $1000.

With specific reference to the contract with Costas, Identify whether the following statement is true or false
ii. Because the promise of the additional $1000 was freely given and was not as a result of fraud or duress, Costas will be able to insist of receiving the additional amount.

Ans- False

Good day sir, I don’t understand why the answer is false because i was assuming the principle of promissory estoppel will apply. I’ll appreciate if you can explain better