preview

Kids Care Case Summary

Decent Essays

With this scenario it is honestly boarder line due to it is but then again it is not enforceable. Gerard’s promise to donate the receipts to Kids Care is enforceable due to he made a contractual promise which means that Gerard has to fulfill it by law. Also, the promise Gerard made created not only a legal but as well as a moral responsibility in which made his promise an enforceable in spite of the lack of consideration. Kids Care had relied on the promise that Gerard made in order to build a residence for homeless teens and with such dependence, it formed a basis for contract rights and duties. On the other hand the promissory estoppel is defined as “individuals rely on promises, and such reliance may form a basis for a contract rights and duties. Under the doctrine of promissory estoppel (also called detrimental reliance), a person who has reasonably relied on the promise of another can often obtain some measure of recovery” (Miller & Hollowell, 2011). …show more content…

“there must be a promise” (Miller & Hollowell, 2011) – Gerard promising to donate the receipts to Kids Care. 2. “The promisee must justifiably rely on the promise” (Miller & Hollowell, 2011) – Kids Care relying on Gerard’s promise to build a homeless home for young teens. 3. “The reliance normally must be of a substantial and definite character” (Miller & Hollowell, 2011) - Gerard is of considerable and definite character. He is an event promoter and coordinator, not a stranger. 4. “Justice will be better served by the enforcement of the promise” (Miller & Hollowell, 2011) – it is for charity, and it would have been going towards a residence of homeless

Get Access