Central London Property v High Trees
 KB 130;  1 All ER 256; 62 TLR 557;  LJR 77; 175 LT 333
P (landlord) promised to reduce rent paid by D for flats (due to wartime oversupply). Toward the end of the war – when conditions changed – P sought full rental from mid 1945 on.
P entitled to amount claimed. However, Denning LJ indicated that if P had claimed the full rental for the entire period, the claim would have failed because P would have been estopped from going back on its promise to accept the lower sum. His Honour held that a promise must be honoured if:
- (a) It was made with the intention of creating legal relations
- (b) The promisor knew it would be acted upon by the promisee; and
- (c) It was acted upon by the promisee to the promisee’s detriment.
Estoppel in such a case could act as a defence to prevent the promisor acting inconsistently with the promise but would not found a cause of action –it was a shield rather than a sword.