| 单词 | Privity of contract |
| 释义 | 契約之相互關係 A contract law rule under which only parties to a contract are legally bound by and entitled to enforce it: Beswick v Beswick [1968] AC 58, [1967] 2 All ER 1197 (HL). The rule prevents contractual burdens being imposed on persons who are not a party to the contract. The privity of contract rule is conceptually distinct from the requirement that consideration must move from the person to whom the promise is made: Re Wyvern Developments Ltd [1974] 2 All ER 535, 1 WLR 1097. A valid contract may be found under the rule where consideration has been provided by the promisee, but the person who is intended to receive the performance of the promise is not a party to the consideration and not a party to the contract: Kepong Prospecting Ld v Schmidt [1968] AC 810. However, in some situations, a third party beneficiary of a contract to which he or she is not a party is entitled to enforce the contract which was made for his or her benefit, for example, where the facts which constitute a breach of the contract between parties to the contract may also give rise to a claim in tort, ie a breach of a duty of care owed to the third party: D & F Estates Ltd v Church Comrs for England [1989] AC 177, [1988] 2 All ER 992 (HL). In such situations the privity rule is not a bar. In relation to a lease, privity of contract allows parties to sue on all covenants of a lease; by contrast, where privity of estate alone exists, the parties may only sue on covenants that touch and concern the land: Oriental Solution Investment Ltd v Sin Ka Wing [1999] 4 HKC 135. Privity of contract results in both original parties to a lease remaining liable for performance of all the lease covenants even after their interests in the lease have been assigned: Oriental Solution Investment Ltd v Sin Ka Wing [1999] 4 HKC 135. See also Consideration; Contract; Privity of estate; Touch and concern. 合約法的規則, 只有合約的當事人受到合約的法律約束及有權強制執行: Beswick v Beswick [1968] AC 58, [1967] 2 All ER 1197 (上議院)。此規則阻止把合約責任加諸在任何非合約當事人的身上。在概念上, 契約之相互關係規則有別於代價必須由向其作出承諾的人提議的要求: Re Wyvern Developments Ltd [1974] 2 All ER 535, 1 WLR 1097。如代價是由承諾人提供, 但意圖獲得承諾履行的人並非代價的當事人也非合約的當事人，一份有效的合約可在此規則下出現, :Kepong Prospecting Ld v Schmidt [1968] AC 810。但在某些情況, 合約的第三者受益人並非合約的當事人, 但享有強制執行為其利益而訂立的合約,例如凡當事人之間構成違反合約的事實, 也可在侵權法提出申索, 即違反對第三者負有的小心責任: D & F Estates Ltd v Church Comrs for England [1989] AC 177, [1988] 2 All ER 992 （上議院）。在此情況下, 相互關係的規則不會禁止。就租約而言, 契約之相互關係准予當事人起訴租約的全部契諾；對比之下，如只有出租人與承租人的相互關係存在，當事人只可在接觸和涉及土地事項的契諾上起訴: Oriental Solution Investment Ltd v Sin Ka Wing [1999] 4 HKC 135。契約之相互關係結果使租約的雙方原來當事人即使其租約權益在轉易後，依然有履行所有租約契諾的法律責任: Solution Investment Ltd v Sin Ka Wing [1999] 4 HKC 135。另見 Consideration; Contract; Privity of estate; Touch and concern。 |
| 随便看 |
|
法律词典收录了8080条英汉双解法律词条，基本涵盖了常用法律英语单词及短语词组的翻译及用法，是法律学习的有利工具。