Third party: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
No edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
 
Line 3: Line 3:
A naive view of commerce would say there are three “dimensions”: the two contractual counterparties (“[[Party A]]” and “[[Party B]]” or, for old fashioned finance types, “[[Bank]]” and “[[Borrower]]”) and then the remainder of the universe comprising disinterested third parties.
A naive view of commerce would say there are three “dimensions”: the two contractual counterparties (“[[Party A]]” and “[[Party B]]” or, for old fashioned finance types, “[[Bank]]” and “[[Borrower]]”) and then the remainder of the universe comprising disinterested third parties.


Tony Blair, of all people, tried to warp the continuum with his ill-fated [[Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999]]. The idea was to confer upon ''third'' parties some of [[fruits of the contract]] where the first and second parties deliberately intended it. This could make a third party some kind of second and a half party as if reduced by some fractal proportion.
Tony Blair, of all people, tried to warp the continuum with his ill-fated [[Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999]]. The idea was to confer upon ''third'' parties some of [[fruits of the contract]] where the first and second parties deliberately intended it. This could make such a third party some kind of second-and-a-half party as if it's dimensionality were reduced by some fractal proportion.
 
But with the advent of of contractual provisions, like nested [[carve-in]]s, which toy with space- tedium [[carvature]] which clearly fold into unexplored space tedium dimensions we wonder whether there is not room 4th 5th or 6th parties?