Pickard v. Sears

Facts

• Pickard owned certain goods that were in the possession of a third party.
• Sears purchased those goods from the third party in good faith, believing the third party had authority to sell.
• Pickard was aware that Sears was dealing with the goods under the impression of ownership but remained silent.
• Pickard subsequently attempted to assert his title over the goods against Sears.
• Sears had altered his position by paying consideration and taking possession.

Issue

1. Whether a person who by silence or conduct allows another to believe a certain state of facts and act upon it is precluded from denying the truth of those facts.

Held

• A person who by words or conduct wilfully causes another to believe in the existence of a certain state of things is estopped from averring a different state of things.
• The representation need not be express; silence or acquiescence, when there is a duty to speak, suffices.
• The party claiming estoppel must have acted on the belief to his detriment or altered his position.
• Pickard, having stood by while Sears acted on the belief that the goods were freely purchasable, could not later assert title.

Ratio Decidendi

The court reasoned that principles of justice and equity demand that where one party, having full knowledge of the true facts, allows another to act upon a mistaken belief to his prejudice, the former shall not afterwards be heard to deny the truth of what he has previously represented by his words or conduct. This principle prevents fraud and injustice arising from inconsistent positions and forms the foundation of estoppel by representation.