Which type of agreement is enforceable under the doctrines of estoppel?

The enforceability of agreements under the doctrines of estoppel typically applies to situations where one party has relied on the representations or actions of another party to their detriment. An executed oral agreement for the transfer of specific performance in real estate ownership can be enforceable under these doctrines because it demonstrates that one party has taken substantial steps based on the promise or intent of another party, leading to a situation where it would be unjust not to enforce that agreement.

In real estate transactions, specific performance is a legal remedy that compels a party to execute a contract according to its terms. Since property transactions often involve significant reliance—such as investments in time, money, or resources—courts may apply estoppel to ensure fairness and uphold agreements when one party has acted in reliance upon the other party's assurances of a contract that has been verbally confirmed and executed.

The other types of agreements mentioned do not typically align with the doctrines of estoppel for various reasons. Oral agreements concerning property rent might not have the same level of reliance or ramifications to compel enforcement through estoppel. Written agreements concerning future land use focus on prospective intentions rather than executed commitments and intentions already acted upon. Finally, agreements between real estate agents for commissions may lack enforceability under estoppel since commission agreements