ABSTRACT
This chapter considers the place of contractual estoppel among other categories of estoppel. It begins with consideration of the issue, raised both judicially and academically, whether contractual estoppel is really an estoppel, or an anomaly, or altogether a misnomer. The chapter also considers the principled basis of contractual estoppel and examines points of distinction from reliance-based estoppels, and those of distinction from and affinity with estoppel by deed. Even as they found contractual estoppel, the courts sometimes doubted that it was estoppel that they found. Noting that contractual estoppel arose independently of detriment, reliance and unconscionability, some judges at first instance considered that this disqualifies contractual estoppel from being recognised as estoppel. Juridical basis for contractual estoppel is contract. Whether estoppel arises by way of enforcement of contract, or by formal admission, or by way of relief from unconscionability, only determines its attribution to a genus, not its nature as estoppel.
