In what scenario is promissory estoppel litigation applicable?

Promissory estoppel operates in situations where a party has made a promise that another party has relied upon to their detriment, even in the absence of a formal contract. This legal doctrine is particularly relevant when a representation or promise causes a claimant to expect certain rights or benefits, such as over property. The key component here is that the claimant has acted on the promise and has experienced some form of detriment, which may not be recoverable under standard contract principles due to the lack of a formal agreement.

In this context, the correct answer highlights the principle of reliance, which is foundational to the doctrine of promissory estoppel. If someone leads another to believe they have rights or interests based on a representation, and that person takes actions accordingly—changes their position or incurs costs, for example—they may seek to enforce those expectations despite the absence of a formal agreement.

Other scenarios like verbal agreements without subsequent reliance do not inherently invoke promissory estoppel unless there’s detrimental reliance demonstrated. Likewise, issues surrounding contested wills or intestacy rules pertain to inheritance law and do not connect to the principles governing promissory estoppel.