Common law estoppel by representation cannot operate as a defence where the represented fact is collateral to the elements of the plaintiff's cause of action — the fact that the State would be estopped from denying that rents were higher than those charged to others did not defeat the State's claim for rent at the contractual rates. Equitable estoppel requires an assumption as to legal relations, not mere facts, and cannot operate where the representee could have had no assumption that the contractual terms would be different from those stated. The continued existence of an equitable compensatory jurisdiction for innocent misrepresentation ([name withheld] v [name withheld]) was left open but the Court expressed significant doubt about its survival. A guarantee clause making the guarantor jointly and severally liable as primary debtor does not require demand as a condition precedent to liability, and the guarantor's cause of action for misleading conduct accrues upon execution of the guarantee.
The full text is available to signed-in members.