Edinburgh Research Explorer

My word is my bond: Unilateral promises again

Research output: Contribution to specialist publicationArticle

Related Edinburgh Organisations

Original languageEnglish
Pages103-109
Number of pages7
Volume2019
Issue number29
JournalScots Law Times (News)
Publication statusPublished - 20 Sep 2019

Abstract

The paper reviews recent case law on the subject of unilateral promises in Scots law, in particular Regus (Maxim) Ltd v. Bank of Scotland plc [2013] CSIH 12, 2013 SC 331, Royal Bank of Scotland v Carlyle [2015] UKSC 13, 2015 SC (UKSC) 93, Landvest PCC Ltd v The Most Reverend Leo Cushley and others [2016] CSOH 129, and Fisher v Applied Drilling Technology International Ltd [2016] CSOH 108. In particular it is suggested that the Landvest case may have adopted an unduly narrow and technical approach in holding that the crucial statements in that case were not promises. A more commercially realistic approach is to be found in the Carlyle and Fisher cases, for which there is also valuable authority in the dicta of Lord President Gill in the Regus Maxim case. The author reiterates a long-standing argument that, properly understood, the doctrine of unilateral promise provides a very useful tool in the appropriate analysis and resolution of commercial disputes.

ID: 110384452