Doctrine Of Promissory Estoppel Coursework Assignment

DOCTRINE OF PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL
NAME
COURSE
Introduction
In the case, John Jones is the plaintiff while Robert Smith of XYZ Corporation is the defendant. John worked for a company in which he was entitled to some benefits which included stock options. Robert promised him a large bonus if he came to work for XYZ and the company makes earnings that exceeded $39.1 million within 3 years. John liked the deal and relying on this promise, he moved to the company. In 3 years’ time, the projections showed that XYZ had reached this target. However, John left the company at the end of the 3rd year. He later came to claim his bonus which he felt he was entitled to since the company had reached the set target by the end of the 3rd year. Robert denied him the bonus arguing that John no longer worked for the company hence was not entitled to it. John is suing the corporation under the doctrine of promissory estoppel since he feels he is entitled to the bonus as damages for leaving a lucrative secure position to work for XYZ.
The case is to determine if John deserved the bonus deserves the bonus under the doctrine of promissory estoppel. Questions presented before the court include, is he entitled to the bonus under this doctrine? Is the argument by XYZ of him not working for the company at the time viable? What does the doctrine say about the situation where John left before the end of 3 years? Does the doctrine give exemptions based on circumstances? Like where John left a lucrative secure position to come and work for XYZ.
The doctrine of promissory estoppel
It is a legal principle which states and puts it that a promise made can be enforced by the law. According to this act, the promise does not have to have been made formally. The act assumes that a promise relies on the promise made by ...