Citation: – [1861] EWHC J57 (QB); (1861) 1 B&S 393 

Date of Judgement: – 7th June 1861

Bench: – Wightman J, Crompton J, Blackburn J 

“A person who has not paid consideration; has no claim on the contract.”

Facts of the Case:

John Tweddle and William Guy mutually decided in writing to pay a sum of (£100 and £200, respectively) to Tweddle’s son William who was about to engage with Miss Guy. Unfortunately, before the fulfilment of the contract, the father of the bride died, and circumstantially, the father of the son died before he could solve the argument between them. As a result of which the groom brought a legal suit against the legal executor of the will made between the parties for its non-fulfillment.  

Issue Raised:

  1. Whether the groom is entitled to take the stand for the enforcement of the contract?
  2. Whether the Doctrine of Privity of Contract is applicable in this case?

Judgment:

The court, after analyzing the fact and the issue raised by the groom, held that the groom is not entitled to claim for the enforcement of the contract. The court said that the groom was neither a party to the contract nor has any consideration in the matter of the promise made by the father’s of the bride; He was solely a third party to the whole agreement entered into by both of the fathers. 

The Court applied the Doctrine of Privity of contract in this regard which clearly specifies that no third party to a contract has the title to claim for its fulfilment in the court of law as being a stranger to the contract; the groom has no legal footing for the enforcement of the contract entered by the other party. Thus, after observing the Doctrine of Privity of Contract in the whole matter court found in favour of the executor of the will.

Personal Opinion: – 

The problem arising out of the Privity of contract is it acts as a bar to the fulfilment of the personal choices of an individual; thus to avoid such complexion following may be adopted for the same:

1. The court should have given thought about the personal choices that both of the fathers had to contribute to the newly married couples in their new life.

2. Being a bar to the personal choices of any individuals, it narrows the definition of Privity of contract.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s