ABSTRACT
The doctrine of
privity of contract is dynamic and
inevitable; therefore it must not be taken with levity. In PRICE V
EASTON for instance it was held that no one may be entitled to or bound by the
terms of a contract to which he is not an original party. The doctrine dictates
that a person who is not a party to a contract can not be granted contractual
rights by the contract or be placed under contractual obligation by it. The
question now is “WHY SHOULD WE ALLOW ONLY PARTIES TO A CONTRACT TO HAVE RIGHTS
UNDER IT”. These and more will be discussed in this long essay.
For the sake of
clarity, this long essay will be divided into four (4) chapters. Chapter 1
looks at the law of contract at a glance (putting into consideration the fact
that the doctrine of privity is sheltered by the law of contract).
The history of the law
of contract and that of the doctrine of privity, the nature of the law of
contract and what makes a contract valid (noting that there are some agreement
that will be seen as a contract by the parties and is not known to law), the
various types of contract and the
relevance of the contract will also be considered under the first chapter
Chapter 2 is going to
be more precise as we will deal basically with the doctrine of privity, the
rationale for the doctrine and the way it operate, its relation to some other
contractual terms will also be considered here.
Chapter 3 will cover
situations in which the doctrine will
not apply (i.e. its exceptions) such as under an agency relationship, insurance
concept, the provision of sec. 81(1) of the property and conveying law, western
Nigeria,
covenant running with land, etcetera will be looked at.
Chapter 4 being the
last chapter will focus on the need for reform of the doctrine by making some
recommendation and suggestions on how best the doctrine can be applied.
FOR COMPLETE PROJECT
CALL 07064961036
No comments:
Post a Comment