Can you sue for false promises

Can you sue for a broken promise? We specialise in claims involving broken promises. We look at the legal doctrine of proprietary estoppel You can sue for a broken promise by using the legal doctrine of proprietary estoppel. However, to give you a broad idea of the principle, a classic proprietary estoppel scenario involves these three essential components: a promise ; reliance on that promise; and detriment suffered as a result.

So, going back to the three components for a successful proprietary estoppel claim, we have: The promise: You will inherit the farm if you work for little or no pay; The reliance: I therefore work hard on the farm for little or no pay ; The detriment: The farm is ultimately left to someone else and I miss out.

Lee Dawkins Lee Dawkins is the firm's marketing partner. He developed our personal injury and clinical negligence teams, creating various niche areas that now enjoy a national profile. He pioneered contentious probate, setting up a flourishing specialist department and established Slee Blackwell as a force within claimant professional negligence.

Share this post:. Share on facebook. Share on twitter. Share on linkedin. An employer should abide by its promises it makes to an employee during employment. The problem is defining what is a promise and what is not. Often an employer will place disclaimers in its employee handbook stating that such guidelines are not promises and that it reserves the right to change them at any time. In rebuttal, one can argue that oral assurances or promises or even written confirmation of such have been given to employees that have caused them to rely on it.

In addition, the general practices of the employer in dealing with certain employment issues might be construed to be a promise. Again, the problem of proof is the difficult part of such a claim against an employer. An employee should keep an employee handbook, if at all possible, to document promises that have been made by the employer. In addition, as stated above, the employee should document any significant promises made.

Even if an employee is fired or laid off for justifiable reasons, there still may be a case for promises breached during or prior to employment. Also, a fraud claim might be available against the employer if intent can be shown.

Some jurisdictions such as California prohibit a fraud claim if it relates to the termination of employment but not to other aspects of employment. Even though this is often the main issue considered by terminated employees, the other types of contractual claims as mentioned above should not be ignored.

Montana is the only state in the country that has a statutory exception to that rule that requires good cause for termination of employment. Neither Lazar nor a spokesman for Rykoff could be reached for comment. The California Supreme Court in recent years has been considered pro-employer, reining in the rights of workers to sue companies.

The court held in November that workers could sue companies for improper demotions. She covers the California Supreme Court and the U. She is now based in San Francisco.

All Sections. About Us. B2B Publishing. Business Visionaries.