Orgee v Orgee [1997]

Key Points of the Case:

• Background: This case involved a dispute where reliance on a promise was a central issue.

• Claim: The claimant argued that they had incurred detriment based on reliance on certain assurances.

• Outcome: The court ruled that there would be no reliance under proprietary estoppel if the claimant would have incurred the same detriment regardless of the promise.

• Reasoning: The decision emphasised that for reliance to be established, it must be shown that the detriment was specifically caused by the reliance on the promise. If the claimant would have suffered the detriment even without the promise, the reliance cannot be said to have occurred.

• Impact: This case clarifies that proving reliance under proprietary estoppel requires demonstrating that the detriment suffered was directly attributable to the reliance on the promise.