Greasley v Cooke [1980]

1. Facts

• Background: Greasley (C), a maid, moved in with Cooke (D) and D’s sister. Greasley developed a romantic relationship with D. When D's sister became gravely ill, Greasley began caring for her.

• Promise: D promised Greasley a home for life in gratitude for her care.

• Issue: After D’s sister passed away, Greasley was not provided with the promised home. D argued that Greasley would have cared for his sister regardless of the promise and that the promise did not influence her decision to stay and care for the sister.

2. Outcome

• Court Decision: The court found in favour of Greasley, applying the principle of promissory estoppel (PE).

• Reasoning: Lord Denning MR established that PE was applicable due to a presumption of reliance on the promise. Once reliance was demonstrated, the burden shifted to D to prove that the promise did not influence Greasley’s decision to stay and care for D’s sister.

3. Impact and Analysis

• Application of PE:

◦ Presumption of Reliance: The case introduced a presumption of reliance when a promise has been made and relied upon. Once it is shown that a promise was made, it is presumed that the promisee relied on it, shifting the burden to the promisor to disprove this reliance.

◦ Burden of Proof: The decision emphasised that once reliance is established, it is the responsibility of the promisor to demonstrate that the reliance did not occur or that the promise did not influence the conduct of the promisee.

• Significance of Reliance:

◦ Presumption in Equity: Lord Denning's judgment underscored the principle that equity can presume reliance when a promise has been made, particularly when a person has acted in a way that suggests they relied on the promise.

◦ Impact on Promises and Actions: The ruling supports the view that promises can have significant legal effects if they result in reliance, regardless of the actual motivations behind the actions taken.

• Broader Implications:

◦ Protection of Promisees: This case illustrates how PE can protect individuals who have acted on promises, ensuring that their reliance on such promises is acknowledged and enforced.

◦ Legal Precedent: Greasley v Cooke serves as a precedent in cases involving promises and reliance, demonstrating that the courts will look beyond the formalities and consider the substance of reliance on promises.