• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free Notes, Lectures, Tests and Forums for ACCA and CIMA exams

  • ACCA
  • CIMA
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Books
  • Forums
  • Ask AI
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login
  • ACCA Forums
  • Ask ACCA Tutor
  • CIMA Forums
  • Ask CIMA Tutor
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Buy/Sell Books
  • All Forums
  • Latest Topics

20% off ACCA & CIMA Books

OpenTuition recommends the new interactive BPP books for March and June 2025 exams.
Get your discount code >>

promissory estoppel – dc builders case

Forums › ACCA Forums › ACCA LW Corporate and Business Law Forums › promissory estoppel – dc builders case

  • This topic has 3 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 13 years ago by perfecta1.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • October 26, 2011 at 6:43 pm #50237
    yifanyang
    Member
    • Topics: 13
    • Replies: 4
    • ☆

    hi i’m a bit confused over this case

    in the notes, it says that settlement before the due date can be taken to be full settlement.

    so how come when the builders accepted £2,400 cash instead of £3,200 cheque from Mrs Rees in 30 days time, they were able to successfully sue her in court for the remaining £800?

    If anyone can clear it up for me, it would be very much appreciated.

    Thanks in advance

    Yifan

    October 27, 2011 at 11:22 am #89117
    MikeLittle
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 27
    • Replies: 23303
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    I believe the “settlement before the due date” brings good discharge when it’s the creditor who asks for early settlement. Otherwise, when you owe someone money payable in, say, two days’ time and you pay a smaller amount, to apply the rule would mean that you are taking a cash discount which wasn’t available to be taken.

    November 10, 2011 at 4:19 am #89118
    veronicaroberts
    Member
    • Topics: 1
    • Replies: 2
    • ☆

    Due to the fact that the Claimants were in financial difficulty, the defendants took advantage and compelled them to accept less of what was really owed to them.

    In order to apply the principle the agreement must be voluntary by both parties.

    Promissory estoppel must be voluntary.

    November 12, 2011 at 3:31 pm #89119
    perfecta1
    Member
    • Topics: 10
    • Replies: 39
    • ☆

    Agree with Veronica. Builders had no choice as to accept part payment. The lady has used their difficult financial possition and paid only 2400.

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Log In

Primary Sidebar

Donate
If you have benefited from our materials, please donate

ACCA News:

ACCA My Exam Performance for non-variant

Applied Skills exams is available NOW

ACCA Options:  “Read the Mind of the Marker” articles

Subscribe to ACCA’s Student Accountant Direct

ACCA CBE 2025 Exams

How was your exam, and what was the exam result?

BT CBE exam was.. | MA CBE exam was..
FA CBE exam was.. | LW CBE exam was..

Donate

If you have benefited from OpenTuition please donate.

PQ Magazine

Latest Comments

  • effy.sithole@gmail.com on IASB Conceptual Framework – Introduction – ACCA Financial Reporting (FR)
  • kyubatuu on MA Chapter 6 Questions Inventory Control
  • hhys on PM Chapter 14 Questions More variance analysis
  • azubair on Time Series Analysis – ACCA Management Accounting (MA)
  • bizuayehuy on Interest rate risk management (1) Part 1 – ACCA (AFM) lectures

Copyright © 2025 · Support · Contact · Advertising · OpenLicense · About · Sitemap · Comments · Log in