Privity Of Contract Flashcards
Tweddle v Atkinson (1861)
Dunlop pneumatic tyre co v selfridge & co 1915
Privity of contract established. Is closely related to consideration. William Tweddle had provided no consideration to buy his father in laws promise to pay him a lump sum so he was unable to enforce the promise, even though the contract stated he could sue.
Beswick v Beswick 1967
Held the wife could succeed in her capacity of administratrix as she represented her deceased husbands contractual interest. She did not however succeed in a personal capacity as she was not party to the contract.
The Eurymedon 1975
The rule also gives rise to commercial inconvenience because it means employers could not easily confer the benefit of exemption clauses upon 3rd party contractors undertaking work on their behalf, though a partial solution to this was established in the eurymedon 1975
Donoghue v Stevenson 1932
Where an ultimate consumer who has suffered loss due to a dangerously defective product may have a limited remedy available to no, even though they were not a party to the contract
Shanklin Pier Ltd v Detel products 1951
If a collateral contract exists between a promisor and a third party, the third party will be able to enforce that contract
Jackson v Horizon holidays 1975
CoA held Mr J had not acted as a trustee for the family but had entered into the contract on their behalf. It was held in Woodar v Wimpey 1980 that this would only apply to contracts such as a family holiday, ordering of a menu for a party, hiring a taxi for a group of people.
Tulk v Moxhay 1848
A seller of land was able to enforce a restrictive covenant against a successor in title of the original purchaser so as to prevent building on the land. Where there is an express or implied declaration of trust that a 3rd party may enjoy benefits passing under the contract the trust will be recognised
