Privity of Contract

?
Privity Rule
Only those party to a contract can benefit from it
1 of 32
Tweddle v Atkinson
Can't sue upon a contract if you have contributed nothing
2 of 32
Dunlop Tyre v Selfridge
A third party cannot be subjected to liabilities within a contract
3 of 32
3 exceptions to privity
(1) Statute (2) Equity (3) Common law
4 of 32
Statute cases (2)
Married Women's Property Act 1882 // Road Traffic Act 1988
5 of 32
Married Women's Property Act 1882
Allows spouse/ children to obtain benefit when concerning life insurance
6 of 32
Road Traffic Act 1988
An insurance company is liable for damage to other vehicles
7 of 32
Reform: STATUTE // Contract (rights of third parties) Act 1999 (5 probs before made)
Previously (1) no general right for 3rd to enforce: must meet exception (2) excepts. only cover specific situation (3) availability of excepts. rely on judge's willingness to adopt creative approach to common law
8 of 32
Contract (rights of third parties) 1999 S1
(1a) states it's intended (1b) clarity (2) both parties intended (3) 3rd identified by name/ desc/ member of group- DON'T HAVE TO BE BORN (5) access to any legal remedy had there been a BREACH
9 of 32
Contract (rights of third parties) 1999 EFFECTS (5)
(1) prevents injustice to 3rd beneficiaries (2) lessen need for courts to stretch legal principles to avoid constraints (3) doesn't do away privity rule (4) common law remains; no obs. imposed ag. will (5) 3rd can't claim if not intended
10 of 32
Equity Cases (2)
Tulk v Moxhay // Smith Snipes Hall Farm v River Douglas Catchment Board
11 of 32
Define Covenant
A promise not to do something (land law: covenant land)
12 of 32
Common Law Cases (2)
AGENCY: The Eurymedon // COLLATERAL: Shanklin Pier v Detel Products
13 of 32
Define Agency
"He who does an act through another does it himself"
14 of 32
Define Collateral
Parties in a contract act as ancestors (in a line)
15 of 32
The Eurymedon // Shanklin Pier v Detel Products
Subcontractors acted as AGENTS, allowing them to rely on exemption clause
16 of 32
4 ways to avoid privity
(1) trust (2) chattel (3) damages (4) tort
17 of 32
Define "implying a trust"
When a party specifies another party may hold the benefit of the contract ON THEIR BEHALF; hence giving enforceable rights
18 of 32
Trust CASES (3)
Les Affreteur Reunis v Walford // Re Schebsman // Beswick v Beswick
19 of 32
Les Affreteur Reunis v Walford
Trusts may be implied to give rights to a presumed benefit
20 of 32
Re Schebsman
No intention to create a trust
21 of 32
Beswick v Beswick
Could not claim through "personal capacity", so instead claimed through spouse's estate
22 of 32
Define "chattel"
Any goods other than land; COVENANTS always run with the contract
23 of 32
Chattel CASES (4)
Dunlop v Selfridge // Taddy v Sterious (unsuccessful) // Tulk v Moxhay // Lord Strathcone v Dominion (successful)
24 of 32
Right to claim damages CASES (2)
Jackson v Horizon Holidays // Woodar Investment Development v Wimpey Construction
25 of 32
Jaackson v Horizon Holidays
LJ Denning in the CofA allowed Jackson to claim damages on behalf of his family; AVOIDING PRIVITY
26 of 32
Woodar Investment Development v Wimpey Construction
HoL disapproved of Denning's ruling in J v HH
27 of 32
Using Tort instead of Contract CASE
White v Jones
28 of 32
Arguments for abolishing Privity (5)
(1) inconvenience (2)justifiable reliance (3)prevents intended benefit (4) prevents consumer protection legislation (5) prevents subcontractor becoming liable to original contracting party (6) prevents manufacturer enforcing terms on eventual seller
29 of 32
Arguments for keeping Privity (5)
(1) free will (2) lack of reciprocal rights (3) flood gates (4) tolerable in practice (5) legal remedies
30 of 32
Has 1999 act improved the situation? YES (2)
(1) statutory exceptions= highest form of law: prospective, publicity (2) general rights easier to understand/ apply
31 of 32
Has 1999 act improved the situation? NO (3)
(1) uncertainty in identifying 3rd party (2) probs with clarity on enforceable rights to 3rd party (3) only deals with specific situations
32 of 32

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Tweddle v Atkinson

Back

Can't sue upon a contract if you have contributed nothing

Card 3

Front

Dunlop Tyre v Selfridge

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

3 exceptions to privity

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

Statute cases (2)

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

Privity
See all Law resources »See all Contract law resources »