[2] The injured party should be put in a substantially similar situation position as they would have been had the contract not been entered into.
They are most often rewarded when the aggrieved party's damages are not capable of accurate estimation and ordering specific performance would be inappropriate.
This is appropriate because even if there is no bargain principle in the agreement, one party has relied on a promise and thus is damaged to the extent of their reliance.
In a promissory estoppel context, consider the following example: Neal, a professional photographer, offers to sell his high-quality camera to Matt for $1,000.
Based on Neal's promise, Matt enrolls in the workshop, paying a non-refundable fee of $500.
Before Matt pays for the camera, Neal decides to sell it to another buyer at a higher price.
Analysis: In this scenario, Matt may claim reliance damages from Neal based on promissory estoppel.
To establish a case, Matt must prove: Here, all elements of promissory estoppel appear to be met.
In this example, the reliance damages would amount to the $500 non-refundable workshop fee, which Matt would not have paid had Neal not promised to sell him the camera.