But the promiseeis bound to release a promise thus unduly obtained.
If the act promised becomes unlawful between the making and the execution of the promise, the promise is made void, and the promisee has no ground of complaint against the promiser.
When the form used did not express or went beyond the intention or was the product of an apparent but not a real intention, the promisee was not to be enriched unjustly at the promisor's expense on the sole basis of the form.
The mere will of the person who undertook or the claim of the promisee was not a reason for enforcing.
Hence in the great majority of cases the promisee cannot compel performance in specie.
According to the latter, unless the promisee has parted with an equivalent or has begun to act in reliance upon the agreement, he has no moral claim to fulfilment.
On the contrary, if the promise is part of an onerous contract, the promisor is bound in justice and the promisee obtains a strict right.
If the promisor explains beforehand to the promisee what he understands by the oath, he swears only in the sense thus set forth by him.
And even though the specific thing for which the promisee sues be of little or no value, it is still an overclaim: for it is often easier for a debtor to pay what is of greater value than what is actually demanded of him.
The alteration of a written contract in a material particular with fraudulent intent by a promisee in effect discharges the contract so far as he is concerned.
In a unilateral contract, before the promise becomes binding, the promiseemust have actually performed what he was requested to do, that is, he must bind himself by actual performance before the offerer's promise is binding on him.
Although the holder may sue it in his own name, the maker may offset any demands which he had against the promisee before it was transferred, as in the case of notes not negotiable.
While again, the duty of Fidelity to promises is also commonly conceived as independent of any injury that might be done to the promisee by breaking it: for (e.
We refer, therefore, to the customary use of language, and customary tacit understandings current among persons in the particular relations in which promiser and promisee stand.
The promiser is bound to perform what both he and the promisee understood to be undertaken.
And, secondly, a different question arises when we consider the possibility of injuring the promisee by fulfilling the promise.
So far we have supposed that the promiser can choose his own words, and that if the promisee finds them ambiguous he can get them modified, or (what comes to the same thing) explained, by the promiser.
In such a case probably all would agree that the promisee ought to release the promiser.
And therefore if the promisee be dead, or otherwise inaccessible and incapable of granting release, there is constituted an exceptional case, of which the solution presents some difficulty.
We have also to consider the case in which an erroneous impression has not been wilfully produced, but was either shared by the promisee or produced in some way unintentionally.
I cannot believe that, if the letter had been delivered to the promisee and was then snatched from his hands before he had read it, there would be no contract.
The condition is not that the promisee shall be a certain other B, or that the contents of the barrel shall be mackerel, [326] but that the promisee has not lied to him about material facts.
If, on the other hand, the words did not warrant the understanding that the service was to be paid for, the service was a gift, and a past gift can no more be a consideration than any other act of the promisee not induced by the promise.
In that case the detriment of delivery would be incurred by the promisee as before, but obviously it would be incurred for the sole purpose of enabling the promisor to carry as agreed.
If the promised event does not come to pass, the plaintiff's property is sold to satisfy the damages, within certain limits, which the promisee has suffered by the failure.
But if the conveyance is more important than the time, and the promisee prefers to have it late rather than never, the law may compel the performance of [301] that.
They may be that he has made an oral promise, and that the promisee has furnished him a consideration.
In many cases a promisee may incur a detriment without thereby furnishing a consideration.
But, for the most part, a breach of promise which discharges the promisee from further performance on his side will also warrant rescission, so that no great harm is done by the popular confusion of the two questions.
If, when a man promised to labor for another, the law made him do it, his relation to his promisee might be called a servitude ad hoc with some truth.
It is said that any benefit conferred by the promisee on the promisor, or any detriment incurred by the promisee, [290] may be a consideration.
He probably will be able to make sure that the promisee has the cotton.
That is, as it is commonly explained, unless the promisee has either conferred a benefit on the promisor, or incurred a detriment, as the inducement to the promise.
The above list will hopefully give you a few useful examples demonstrating the appropriate usage of "promisee" in a variety of sentences. We hope that you will now be able to make sentences using this word.
