International records / OpenAlex research

difficulty in getting the vehicles serviced, with the result that the owners agreed to instalments under the hire-purchase contract being withheld whenever the vehicles were not in active service. The owners later sought to revert to the original terms, requiring the defendants to pay all instalments due. The Privy Council held that the owners’ claim was not defeated by the doctrine of promissory estoppel as there was no proof that the lorries remained unavailable for use: EA Ajayi v RT Briscoe

EA Ajayi v RT Briscoe (Nigeria) Ltd [1964] 1 WLR 1326, PC, p 1329 Lord Hodson: The defendant’s final contention was that having altered his position in the manner indicated the owners never gave notice that the period of suspension was at an end before issuing their summons and that accordingly the lorries never having been returned or made available for service he was entitled to rely on the equitable defence as defined by Bowen LJ in the Birmingham and District Land Co case. Alternatively he went further and contended on the authority of the cases of Central London Property Trust Ltd v High …