Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Privity
1) Laws of Succession -
administratix
•Beswick v Beswick –
widow sued to enforce
promise of payments by
the husband but as the
wife was not privy to the
contract, however as the
adminstratix she was
successful
2) Law of subrogation
•Relating to insurance
contracts
•Guarantor has the same
rights as the principle
against the debtor
3) Law of property
•Purpose of the law of
property was to
consolidate enactments
relating to conveyances.
No drastic changes is
intended so that the
presumption as seen in
Beswick could only be
rebutted by clear
language
•There was a devisive
rejection of the scope of
s56(1) in the ruling in
Beswick
4) Laws of Trust
•Property held by one
person for another
Lloyds v Harper
where the father
formed a contract to
ensure that his son
will be employed by
Lloyds and the court
agreed that where
this contract is made
the son should be
able to recover as if
the contract was with
the son himself
5) Law of Agency
•Agent may contract
on the part of the
principal
•Guarantor has the
same rights as the
principle against the
debtor (Scrutton v
Midland – stevedores
attempted to rely on
an exclusion clause
between the shipping
company and the
Plaintiffs but could
not succeed.
However Lord Reid
suggested that they
could be brought
into contractual
relations. See below
6) Law of Tort
•Persons does not
have the right to go
against contracting
parties beyond there
entitled benefits.
(Donoghue v
Stephenson)
Statutes eg
•Married women Acts
• Insurance acts
•Road Traffic Acts
Lack of clarity (beswick v
Beswick – widow was allowed
to sue as administratix and
could calim under the law of
property
Tension between the literal
and purpose rule as seen in
Beswick where the
interpretation of the property
act was concerned
Language was broad in
terms of the property Act
which was used with some
reluctance by the House of
Lords
Consideration –
Privity bars a
claim despite
consideration
Equity – Privity is
not very rigid
with equity.
