This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2013-06-05 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| Through estoppel, an admission or representation is rendered conclusive upon the person making it, and cannot be denied or disproved as against the person relying on it.[16] This doctrine is based on the grounds of public policy, fair dealing, good faith, and justice and its purpose is to forbid one to speak against his own act, representations or commitments to the injury of one to whom they were directed and who reasonably relied on it.[17] Thus, in order for this doctrine to operate, a representation must have been made to the detriment of another who relied on it. In other words, estoppel would not lie against one who, in the first place, did not make any representation. | |||||
|
2010-10-18 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| Through estoppel, an admission or representation is rendered conclusive upon the person making it, and cannot be denied or disproved as against the person relying on it.[27] This doctrine is based on the grounds of public policy, fair dealing, good faith and justice, and its purpose is to forbid one to speak against his own act, representations, or commitments to the injury of one to whom they were directed and who reasonably relied on it.[28] It bears noting, however, that no estoppel arises where the representation or conduct of the party sought to be estopped is due to ignorance founded upon an innocent mistake.[29] | |||||