Kanak v Minister for Land and Water Conservation (No 2)

The applicant sought to prevent the respondent from proceeding with the sale of a parcel of land on the basis that the sale would constitute a breach of a promise made to the applicant by the respondent, and that the applicant would suffer loss and damage as a result of the sale. The applicant claimed relief in the form of an interlocutory injunction, and damages. The dispute was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The legal issues in this case concerned whether the applicant could rely on promissory estoppel in order to prevent the respondent from proceeding with the sale of the land, and whether damages were available to the applicant. The court needed to determine whether a promise had been made by the respondent to the applicant, whether the applicant had acted in reliance on that promise, and whether it would be inequitable for the respondent to go back on that promise. The court also needed to decide whether the applicant had suffered loss as a result of the respondent’s actions.

The court found that the applicant had failed to establish a promise that was clear and unequivocal, and which the applicant had acted in reliance upon. The court held that the applicant had not provided evidence of any detriment suffered as a result of the alleged promise. The court further found that the doctrine of promissory estoppel did not apply to the facts of the case. As a result, the applicant’s claims for injunctive relief and damages were dismissed. The applicant was ordered to pay the respondent’s costs of the motions.