Equitable Estoppel: Is ‘Palm Tree Justice’ Back?

Federal Court in Boustead Trading Sdn Bhd v Arab-Malaysian Merchant Bank Bhd. (the Boustead case) ruled that detriment was not an integral part of doctrine of equitable estoppel. This paper argues that detriment, a traditional feature of equitable estoppel, is an integral part of factor of unconscionability in The Duty to Ensure Reliability of Induced Assumptions. It is further pointed out that detriment suffered by promisee is an essential factor that court ought to take into account when assessing applicability of doctrine of equitable estoppel. To this end, this paper examines: (a) content of the duty to ensure reliability of induced assumptions; and (b) law on equitable estoppel in Malaysia prior to and with regard to Federal Court decision in the Boustead case. In conclusion, this paper advocates Spencian model of a structured and principled approach to doctrine of equitable estoppel in general and to promissory estoppel in particular. Detriment is an essential feature of Specian model.