83,357
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|boilerplate| | {{a|boilerplate| | ||
[[File:Third man.jpg|450px|thumb|center|Why the hostility towards third parties, [[counsellor]]? What did they ever to do you?]] | [[File:Third man.jpg|450px|thumb|center|Why the hostility towards third parties, [[counsellor]]? What did they ever to do you?]] | ||
}}It is now lost in the mists of history, but once upon a time there must have been a reason why lawyers of the international capital markets were so collectively hostile to the [[Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999]], a small piece of well-intended legislation which allowed contractual parties to agree that persons benefiting from their contract, but who were not parties to it (and thus did not have the necessary “[[privity of contract]]” required by the [[common law]] to take action under it), might, upon a breach, be allowed to sue the breaching party directly to recover their loss. | {{subtable:Sample [[CRTPA]] clause:<br>No one who is not a party to this agreement has any rights under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 to enforce any of its terms.}}}}It is now lost in the mists of history, but once upon a time there must have been a reason why lawyers of the international capital markets were so collectively hostile to the [[Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999]], a small piece of well-intended legislation which allowed contractual parties to agree that persons benefiting from their contract, but who were not parties to it (and thus did not have the necessary “[[privity of contract]]” required by the [[common law]] to take action under it), might, upon a breach, be allowed to sue the breaching party directly to recover their loss. | ||
Look, who could possibly object to that worthy goal? | Look, who could possibly object to that worthy goal? |