82,882
edits
Waiver by estoppel: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
*'''A representation must be some kind of positive act''': Simply not enforcing a term does ''not'' give rise to an [[estoppel]] or a [[waiver]]: “It is difficult to imagine how silence and inaction can be anything but equivocal”<ref>{{casenote|Allied Marine Transport|Vale do Rio Doce Navegaçao SA (The Leonidas D.)}}</ref>. | *'''A representation must be some kind of positive act''': Simply not enforcing a term does ''not'' give rise to an [[estoppel]] or a [[waiver]]: “It is difficult to imagine how silence and inaction can be anything but equivocal”<ref>{{casenote|Allied Marine Transport|Vale do Rio Doce Navegaçao SA (The Leonidas D.)}}</ref>. | ||
*The [[estoppel]] is specific to the particular circumstance. If you have a recurring right (you know, like to make a [[margin call]]), then just because you waived it once — even if you somehow permanently waived it — that doesn’t mean you have waived it for all time. Just because you didn’t enforce this time, that doesn’t mean you are prevented from ever enforcing in the future. | *The [[estoppel]] is specific to the particular circumstance. If you have a recurring right (you know, like to make a [[margin call]]), then just because you waived it once — even if you somehow permanently waived it — that doesn’t mean you have waived it for all time. Just because you didn’t enforce this time, that doesn’t mean you are prevented from ever enforcing in the future. | ||
{{course of dealing vs waiver}} | |||
{{waiver}} | {{waiver}} | ||
*[[Don’t take a piece of paper to a knife fight]] | *[[Don’t take a piece of paper to a knife fight]] | ||
{{ref}} | {{ref}} | ||