DOCSLIB.ORG

Contracts for the Benefit of Third Parties

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Contracts for the Benefit of Third Parties The Law Commission Consultation Paper No. 121 Privity of Contract: Contracts for the Benefit of Third Parties HMSO The Law Commission was set up by section 1 of the Law Commissions Act 1965 for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law. The Law Commissioners are: The Honourable Mr. Justice Peter Gibson, Chairman Mr. Trevor M. Aldridge Mr. Jack Beatson Mr. Richard Buxton, Q.C. Professor Brenda Hoggett, Q.C. The Secretary of the Law Commission is Mr. Michael Collon and its offices are at Conquest House, 37-38 John Street, Theobalds Road, London WCIN 280. This consultation paper, completed on 23 October 1991, is circulated for comment and criticism only. It does not represent the final views of the Law Commission. The Law Commission would be grateful for comments before 30 June 1992. All correspondence should be addressed to: Mr. S. McMaster Law Commission Conquest House 37-38 John Street Theobalds Road London WClN 2BQ (Tel: 071-411 1215 Fax: 071-411 1297). It may be helpful for the Law Commission, either in discussion with others concerned or in any subsequent recommendations, to be able to refer to and attribute comments submitted in response to this consultation paper. Whilst any request to treat all, or part, of a response in confidence will, of course, be respected, if no such request is made the Law Commission will assume that the response is not intended to be confidential. I i The Law Commission Consultation Paper No. 121 Privity of Contract: Contracts for the Benefit of Third Parties LONDON: HMSO @ Crown copyright 1991 Applications for reproduction should be made to HMSO First Published 1991 ISBN 0 11 730203 1 THE LAW COMMISSION PRIVITY OF CONTRACT: CONTRACTS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THIRD PARTIES CONTENTS Paragraph PART I INTRODUCTION 1.1 - 1.6 1 PART I1 THE MEANING AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE THIRD PARTY RULE 2.1 - 2.19 7-20 1. Meaning of the third party rule 2.1 7 2. Privity and the rule that consideration must move from the promisee 2.5 9 3. Development of the third party rule 2.11 13 4. What is a contract for the benefit of a third party? 2.17 18 PART I11 EXCEPTIONS AND CIRCUMVENTIONS OF THE THIRD PARTY RULE 3.1 - 3.56 20-64 1. Recourse to other areas of the law 3.3 - 3.21 22-36 (a) The law of trusts 3.3 22 (b) The law of real property 3.6 25 (C) The law of tort 3.8 27 (a) The law of bailment 3.18 33 2. Collateral Contracts 3.22 36 3. Exemption clauses 3.23 37 4. Documentary letters of credit 3.32 48 5. Joint promisees 3.33 48 Paragraph 6. Assignment 3.34 49 7. Agency 3.36 51 8. Promisee assisting the third party 3.39 53 9. Statutory Exceptions 3.45 57 PART IV THE CASE FOR REFORM 4.1 - 4.35 65-96 1. An overall assessment of the rule 4.3 66 2. Shipping 4.8 73 3. Construction 4.12 76 4. Liability from the making of statements 4.15 78 5. Sale of Goods 4.19 82 6. Insurance 4.22 84 7. Contracts to pay money to a third party 4.23 84 8. Wills 4.25 86 9. Contractual Licences 4.26 87 10. Limits on the ability of the promisee to assist the third party 4.27 88 11. The Report of the Law Revision Committee 4.30 90 12. Contracts burdening third parties 4.33 92 13. Summary 4.34 94 PART V THE MAIN ISSUES EXAMINED 5.1 - 5.46 97-131 1. Scope of Legislation 5.1 97 2. Test of enforceable benefit 5.8 101 3. Range of benefits 5.16 106 4. Designation of third party 5.19 108 5. Ascertainability and Existence of third party 5.20 109 6. Defences and joinder 5.24 111 7. Variation and cancellation 5.27 114 a. Discretion to order variation or discharge for reasons of justice 5.32 119 (ii) Paragraph Page 9. Can the promisee sue in addition to the third party? 5.34 121 10. Overlap of remedies against both contracting parties 5.35 122 11. No creation of duties in third parties 5.36 123 12. Existing exceptions 5.38 125 13. Concurrent actions 5.39 127 14. Third party beneficiaries under wills 5.40 128 15. Conclusion 5.45 130 PART VI SUMMARY OF OUR PROVISIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REFORM 6.1 - 6.21 132-138 APPENDIX 139 CONTRACTS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THIRD PARTIES IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS 139 Western Australia 2. 140 Queensland 4. 141 The Commonwealth of Australia 5. 143 New Zealand 9. 145 United States of America 14. 151 The Republic of Ireland 21. 155 Scotland 22. 156 France 24. 158 Germany 28. 161 Roman-Dutch Law 30. 163 Summary Table of Foreign Juridictions 165 (iii) PART I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Although a contract or its performance can affect a third party,l the doctrine of privity means that, as a general rule, a contract cannot confer rights or impose obligations arising under it on any person except the parties to it.2 There are several different aspects of the doctrine: (i) a person cannot enforce rights under a contract to which he is not a party; (ii) a person who is not party to a contract cannot have contractual liabilities imposed on him; (iii) contractual remedies are designed to compensate parties to the contract, not third parties. 1 This paper is primarily concerned with the general rule that l a person cannot enforce a right under a contract to which he 1- As when C guarantees a debt owed by A to B and A pays, thus releasing C who thereby indirectly gains a benefit, or where the contract or its performance creates a property right in a third party. 2- Before Donoghue v. Stevenson Cl9321 A.C. 562, the privity doctrine was seen as precluding actions in tort by third parties arising from negligence by a party to a contract in carrying it out: Winterbottom v. Wright (1842) 10 M. & W. 109; 152 E.R. 402. 1 is not a party,3 and references in it to the "third party rule" are to this. 1.2 Whilst it is self-evidently desirable that a complete stranger to a contract should not have contractual obligations forced upon him,4 the general rule that a third party cannot acquire rights under a contract to which he is not privy has been much criticised. This criticism has come from academics,5 law reform bodies (including the Law Revision Committee6) and the j~diciary.~In 1967, in Beswick v. Beswick,8 Lord Reid cited with approval the Law Revision Committee's proposals that when a contract by its express terms purports to confer a benefit directly on a third party, it shall be enforceable by the third party in his own name. While implying that the way forward was by legislation, he stated that the House of Lords might find it necessary to deal with the matter if there was a further long period of Parliamentary procrastination. In Swain v. 3- Atiyah, An Introduction to the Law of Contract (4th ed., 1989). pp. 371-372. 4. We shall see that different considerations apply when P is taking the benefit of a contract to which he is not a party and D wishes to rely on defences in that contract. Here, although D purports to burden P, the latter is not a complete stranger. In seeking to take the benefit of a contract to which he is not privy, fairness dictates that he should, in principle, take the burden. 5- Corbin, (1930) 46 L.Q.R. 12; Furmston, (1960) 23 M.L.R. 373; Wylie, (1966) 17 N.I.L.Q. 351; Markesinis, (1987) 103 L.Q.R. 354; Flannigan, (1987) 103 L.Q.R. 564; Reynolds, (1989) 105 L.Q.R. 1; Kincaid, Cl9891 C.L.J. 243; Adams & Brownsword, (1990) 10 L.S. 12; Beyleveld & Brownsword, (1991) 54 M.L.R. 48. 6- (1937), Cmd. 5449. See para. 4.30 below. 7- See Part IV below for the details of these criticisms. 8. [1968] A.C. 58, 72. 2 Law Society,' Lord Diplock referred to the general I non-recognition of third party rights as "an anachronistic shortcoming that has for many years been regarded as a I reproach to English private law". In Woodar Investment I ) I Development Ltd. v. Wimpey Construction (U.K. Ltd., lo Lord ' Salmon regarded the law concerning damages for loss suffered by third parties as most unsatisfactory and hoped that, unless it were altered by statute, the House of Lords would reconsider it.ll Lord Scarman reminded the House that twelve years had passed since Lord Reid had called for a reconsideration of the rule in Beswick v. Beswick, and hoped I that all the cases which "stand guard over this unjust rule" might be reviewed.l2 1.3 The Law Commission first became interested in this subject after its creation in 1965. Item 1 of the First Programme of law reform was the codification of the law of I contract. Item 3 included the topic of third party rights. A ~ substantial amount of work was done on this topic in I conjunction with work on consideration. At that time it was felt that reform of privity could not usefully be undertaken without reform of the doctrine of consideration. After the decision in 1973 to suspend work on the production of a ' contract code,13 other contract projects have taken 9- [1983] 1 A.C.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Drafting and Enforcing Complex Indemnification Provisions
    Drafting And Enforcing Complex Indemnification Provisions D. Hull D. Hull Youngblood, Jr. and Peter N. Flocos Youngblood, Jr. is a partner in the Forget about copy and paste. The best indem­ Austin, Texas office nification provisions start with the details of of K&L Gates LLP. Mr. Youngblood the transaction. focuses his practice on government contracting, the security industry and com plex THE PURPOSE of this article is to assist transactional financial transactions, and regularly represents and litigation attorneys in the negotiation and drafting clients in a wide array of local, state, and federal of customized, and therefore more effective, indemnifi- contracting transactions and disputes. He can be cation provisions in a wide range of situations, and also reached at [email protected]. to spot certain litigation issues that may arise out of in- demnification provisions. This article will identify issues Peter N. and strategies and suggested language that can act as a Flocos starting point to protect the client’s interests in the area is a partner in the of indemnification in complex transactions and litigation. New York City Readers should note that this article is for informational office of K&L Gates purposes, does not contain or convey legal advice, and LLP. Mr. Flocos, may or may not reflect the views of the authors’ firm or who began his any particular client or affiliate of that firm. The infor- legal career as mation herein should not be used or relied upon in regard a transactional lawyer and then to any particular facts or circumstances without first con- became a litigator, sulting a lawyer.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    17 May 2016 Learn With Us: Boilerplate clauses Jenny Mee, Partner, K&L Gates © Copyright 2016 by K&L Gates. All rights reserved. INTRODUCTION This publication is for informational purposes and does not contain or convey legal advice. The information herein should not be used or relied upon in regard to any particular facts or circumstances 5/17/2016 without first consulting a lawyer. ©2016 K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved. 1 WHAT IS A “BOILERPLATE” CLAUSE? Boilerplate is any text that is or can be reused in new contexts or applications without being greatly changed from the original (Wikipedia) In contract law, the term "boilerplate language" describes the parts of a contract that are considered standard (Wikipedia) klgates.com 3 ETYMOLOGY ° Wikipedia: ° "Boiler plate" originally referred to the sheet steel used to make boilers ° The analogy between the curved steel used to make water boilers and curved metal used to print prepared text was based on: ° the curved shape of the plate; and ° the fact that it had been prepared elsewhere before being incorporated into a downstream producer’s finished product ° In the field of printing, the term dates back to the early 1900s klgates.com 4 This publication is for informational purposes and does not contain or convey legal advice. The information herein should not be used or relied upon in regard to any particular facts or circumstances 5/17/2016 without first consulting a lawyer. ©2016 K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved. 2 EXAMPLES OF BOILERPLATE CLAUSES ° “General” clause at the back, covering (eg): ° Governing law and jurisdiction ° Notices ° Entire agreement ° Further assurances ° No waiver ° Severability ° Contra proferentum (no adverse interpretation) ° Standard definitions and interpretation provisions ° Other standard clauses ° eg force majeure, termination, insurance, etc klgates.com 5 AGENDA FOR THIS SESSION ° Entire agreement clauses ° Set-off clauses ° No waiver clauses klgates.com 6 This publication is for informational purposes and does not contain or convey legal advice.
    [Show full text]
  • Law 410 CONTRACTS BUCKWOLD
    Law 410 CONTRACTS BUCKWOLD 1 FORMATION: Is there a contract? In order to have a contract, you must have: o Capacity to contract: Note that minors can enforce a contract against adults, but adults cannot enforce against minors. o Consensus ad idem – ie “meeting of the minds”: Parties must be in agreement to the same terms. Offer & acceptance . Certainty as to terms o Consideration: Parties must have exchanged value not necessarily money, but what they deem to be value. 2 types of contract: o Bilateral: promissory offer by X + acceptance by Y entailing a reciprocal promise . E.g. X offers to sell car to Y for $5000 (offer). Y agrees to by the car (acceptance) = Contract! Which includes: Express terms (e.g. price, model, payment, etc.) Implied terms (implied on basis of presumed intention) o Unilateral: promissory offer by X + acceptance by Y through performance of requested act(s) . E.g. X offers to give Y a sandwich if Y dusts X‟s house (offer). Y dusts (acceptance) = Contract! Which includes: Express terms Implied terms (see above) TERMS OF CONTRACT Note: As a general rule, terms of a contract are those expressly established by the offer plus terms that may be implied. (See MJB Enterprises for more on implied terms) Does lack of subjective knowledge of the terms of an offer preclude recognition and enforcement of an unknown term? No. If the terms are readily accessible, then signing the contract (or clicking “I accept”) constitutes agreeing to them. Rudder v. Microsoft Corp Class action lawsuit against Microsoft; Microsoft said
    [Show full text]
  • Wolfsberg Group Trade Finance Principles 2019
    Trade Finance Principles 1 The Wolfsberg Group, ICC and BAFT Trade Finance Principles 2019 amendment PUBLIC Trade Finance Principles 2 Copyright © 2019, Wolfsberg Group, International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and BAFT Wolfsberg Group, ICC and BAFT hold all copyright and other intellectual property rights in this collective work and encourage its reproduction and dissemination subject to the following: Wolfsberg Group, ICC and BAFT must be cited as the source and copyright holder mentioning the title of the document and the publication year if available. Express written permission must be obtained for any modification, adaptation or translation, for any commercial use and for use in any manner that implies that another organization or person is the source of, or is associated with, the work. The work may not be reproduced or made available on websites except through a link to the relevant Wolfsberg Group, ICC and/or BAFT web page (not to the document itself). Permission can be requested from the Wolfsberg Group, ICC or BAFT. This document was prepared for general information purposes only, does not purport to be comprehensive and is not intended as legal advice. The opinions expressed are subject to change without notice and any reliance upon information contained in the document is solely and exclusively at your own risk. The publishing organisations and the contributors are not engaged in rendering legal or other expert professional services for which outside competent professionals should be sought. PUBLIC Trade Finance Principles
    [Show full text]
  • In Dispute 30:2 Contract Formation
    CHAPTER 30 CONTRACTS Introductory Note A. CONTRACT FORMATION 30:1 Contract Formation ― In Dispute 30:2 Contract Formation ― Need Not Be in Writing 30:3 Contract Formation ― Offer 30:4 Contract Formation ― Revocation of Offer 30:5 Contract Formation ― Counteroffer 30:6 Contract Formation ― Acceptance 30:7 Contract Formation ― Consideration 30:8 Contract Formation ― Modification 30:9 Contract Formation ― Third-Party Beneficiary B. CONTRACT PERFORMANCE 30:10 Contract Performance — Breach of Contract — Elements of Liability 30:11 Contract Performance — Breach of Contract Defined 30:12 Contract Performance — Substantial Performance 30:13 Contract Performance — Anticipatory Breach 30:14 Contract Performance — Time of Performance 30:15 Contract Performance — Conditions Precedent 30:16 Contract Performance — Implied Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing — Non-Insurance Contract 30:17 Contract Performance — Assignment C. DEFENSES Introductory Note 30:18 Defense — Fraud in the Inducement 30:19 Defense — Undue Influence 30:20 Defense — Duress 30:21 Defense — Minority 30:22 Defense — Mental Incapacity 30:23 Defense — Impossibility of Performance 30:24 Defense — Inducing a Breach by Words or Conduct 30:25 Defense — Waiver 30:26 Defense — Statute of Limitations 30:27 Defense — Cancellation by Agreement 30:28 Defense — Accord and Satisfaction (Later Contract) 30:29 Defense — Novation D. CONTRACT INTERPRETATION Introductory Note 30:30 Contract Interpretation — Disputed Term 30:31 Contract Interpretation — Parties’ Intent 30:32 Contract Interpretation —
    [Show full text]
  • SAMPLE NOTES from OUR LLB CORE GUIDE: Contract Law Privity Chapter
    SAMPLE NOTES FROM OUR LLB CORE GUIDE: Contract Law Privity chapter LLB Answered is a comprehensive, first-class set of exam-focused study notes for the Undergraduate Law Degree. This is a sample from one of our Core Guides. We also offer dedicated Case Books. Please visit lawanswered.com if you wish to purchase a copy. Notes for the LPC are also available via lawanswered.com. This chapter is provided by way of sample, for marketing purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. No warranties as to its contents are provided. All rights reserved. Copyright © Answered Ltd. PRIVITY KEY CONCEPTS 5 DOCTRINE OF PRIVITY Under the common law: A third party cannot… enforce , be liable for, or acquire rights under … a contract to which he is not a party. AVOIDING THE DOCTRINE OF PRIVITY The main common law exceptions are: AGENCY RELATIONSHIPS ASSIGNMENT TRUSTS JUDICIAL INTERVENTION The main statutory exception is: CONTRACTS (RIGHTS OF THIRD PARTIES) ACT 1999 44 PRIVITY WHAT IS PRIVITY? “The doctrine of privity means that a contract cannot, as a general rule, confer PRIVITY rights or impose obligations arising under it on any person except the parties to it.” Treitel, The Law of Contract. Under the doctrine of privity: ACQUIRE RIGHTS UNDER A third party cannot BE LIABLE FOR a contract to which he is not a party. ENFORCE NOTE: the doctrine is closely connected to the principle that consideration must move from the promisee (see Consideration chapter). The leading cases on the classic doctrine are Price v Easton, Tweddle v Atkinson and Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v Selfridges & Co Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Position Agreement with Personal Guarantee at Bank Medan Branch
    Legal Position Agreement with Personal Guarantee at Bank Medan Branch Vincent Leonardo Tantowie, Willy Tanjaya, and Herman Brahmana, Elvira Fitriyani Pakpahan Magister of Notary, Universitas Prima Indonesia, Jl. Sekip Simpang Sikambing, Medan, Indonesia Keywords: Legal Agreement, Guarantee and Personal Guarantee. Abstract: In providing credit facilities, all banks always refer to the Loan to Value of the credit value. The value of the collateral provided is in the form of material guarantees, whether installed on a KPR, KPR, Fiduciary basis or Pawn and Cessie. If there is a lack of guarantee value that is relaxed by the internal and external assessment team, the Bank always asks for additional guarantees in the form of personal guarantees (personal guarantees) or company guarantees (company guarantees). This must be watched out for by bankers or legal officers of a finance company where if a company or individual has provided personal guarantees for a debt from a certain debtor, then it must be given strict provisions, that the guarantor must also be accompanied by a material guarantee. 1 INTRODUCTION this note, attention is paid to the importance of structuring the details of claims and the Banks as a company engaged in finance, all banking consequences for which employee claims are activities are always related to the financial sector, formulated incorrectly. Possible solutions available so talking about banks is inseparable from financial to employees in terms of both general law and problems. Banking activities that are the first to raise statutory are investigated (Barnard, 2010). If we funds from the wider community known as banking look deeper into the business activities of banks, in activities are funding activities.
    [Show full text]
  • Contracts of Adhesion-Some Thoughts About Freedom of Contract
    CONTRACTS OF ADHESION-SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT FREEDOM OF CONTRACT FRIEDRICH KESSLER With the development of a free enterprise system based on an un- heard of division of labor, capitalistic society needed a highly elastic legal institution to safeguard the exchange of goods and services on the market. Common law lawyers, responding to this social need, trans- formed "contract" from the clumsy institution that it was in the six- teenth century into a tool of almost unlimited usefulness and pliability. Contract thus became the indispensable instrument of the enterpriser, enabling him to go about his affairs in a rational way. Rational be- havior within the context of our culture is only possible if agreements will be respected. It requires that reasonable expectations created by promises receive the protection of the law or else we will suffer the fate of Montesquieu's Troglodytes, who perished because they did not ful- fill their promises. This idea permeates our whole law of contracts, the doctrines dealing with their formation, performance, impossibility and damages. Under a free enterprise system rationality of the law of contracts has still another aspect.1 To keep pace with the constant widening of the market the legal system has to place at the disposal of the members of the community an ever increasing number of typical business trans- actions and regulate their consequences. But the law cannot possibly anticipate the content of an infinite number of atypical transactions into which members of the community may need to enter. Society, therefore, has to give the parties freedom of contract; to accommodate the business community the ceremony necessary to vouch for the delib- erate nature of a transaction has to be reduced to the absolute minimum.
    [Show full text]
  • IN the COURT of APPEALS of IOWA No. 9-342 / 08-1570 Filed
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 9-342 / 08-1570 Filed July 22, 2009 ADDISON INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant, vs. KNIGHT, HOPPE, KURNICK & KNIGHT, L.L.C., Defendant-Appellee. ________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Mitchell E. Turner, Judge. Appellant appeals the grant of summary judgment and asserts legal malpractice against its former counsel. AFFIRMED. Robert Hogg and Patrick M. Roby of Elderkin & Pirnie, P.L.C., Cedar Rapids, for appellant. James E. Shipman and Chad M. VonKampen of Simmons Perrine Moyer Bergman, P.L.C., Cedar Rapids, and David Macksey and Victor J. Pioli of Johnson & Bell, Ltd., Chicago, Illinois, for appellee. Heard by Sackett, C.J., and Vogel and Miller, JJ. 2 VOGEL, J. Addison Insurance Company (Addison) appeals the grant of summary judgment in favor of its former counsel, Knight, Hoppe, Kurnik & Knight, L.L.C. (Knight) on a legal malpractice claim. We affirm. I. Background Facts and Proceedings The underlying lawsuit was brought in New York on March 24, 1995, by the administratrix of the Gary Ketten Estate after Ketten was killed in a vehicle collision on April 2, 1993. The suit generally alleged Knoedler Manufacturing Company (Old Knoedler) was liable for the manufacture of a defective truck seat. Addison insured Old Knoedler at the time of the accident. On December 17, 1993, approximately nine months after the accident, Old Knoedler was sold to Sturhand Investments, Inc., who also purchased the name Knoedler Manufacturers, Inc., (New Knoedler). The sale was made under an asset purchase agreement.1 Addison also insured New Knoedler from December 18, 1993, to December 18, 1994, but provided no coverage to New Knoedler for the date of the accident, nor was there any assignment of insurance coverage in the asset purchase agreement.
    [Show full text]
  • Contract of Guarantee for Non-Shareholder Loans Between
    CONTRACT NO. <00000> FORM For information purposes Contract of Guarantee for Non-Shareholder Loans Non-Honoring of a Sovereign Financial Obligation between the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency and [Guarantee Holder] This draft document is subject to MIGA’s approval and as such cannot be considered a contract or an offer to enter into a contract. Only the document executed by MIGA, as approved by MIGA’s senior management and the Guarantee Holder, will contain the terms and conditions that shall bind them. Until this document is executed by MIGA and the Guarantee Holder, neither MIGA nor the Guarantee Holder intends to be bound by its terms and conditions. The terms and conditions of this draft document are distributed to the Guarantee Holder on a confidential basis. [2016 FORMS – OCTOBER 2016] CONTRACT OF GUARANTEE FOR NHSFO CONTRACT NO. <00000> Contract of Guarantee for Non-Shareholder Loans Non-Honoring of a Sovereign Financial Obligation Table of Contents Part I – Special Conditions .............................................................................................................. 1 Part II – General Conditions ............................................................................................................ 5 Article 1. Application and Interpretation .................................................................................... 5 Article 2. Definitions .................................................................................................................. 5 Article 3. Non-Honoring of a Sovereign
    [Show full text]
  • Lesser Known Breach of Contract Defenses
    LESSER KNOWN BREACH OF CONTRACT DEFENSES Jack A. Walters, III Cooper & Scully, P.C. Founders Square 900 Jackson Street, Suite 100 Dallas, Texas 75202 (214) 712-9500 (214) 712-9540 fax www.cooperscully.com [email protected] 3rd Annual Construction Symposium January 25, 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................1 II. BACKGROUND ON CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS..................................................1 A. Contract Documents...............................................................................................1 B. Checklist of Issues Covered in a Contract..............................................................1 C. Definitions..............................................................................................................2 III. CONTRACT DEFENSES...................................................................................................3 A. Limitations (Statute of Limitations & Statute of Repose)......................................3 B. Standing/Privity......................................................................................................5 C. Failure of consideration / Lack of consideration....................................................6 D. Mistake 7 E. Ratification.............................................................................................................8 F. Waiver 9 G. Plaintiff's Prior Material Breach.............................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • Amicus Brief June 29, 2016
    Amici curiae respectfully submit this brief pursuant to Maryland Rule 8-511 in support of the Maryland Court of Special Appeals’ application of the Economic Loss Rule. STATEMENT OF INTEREST Amici curiae are comprised of four national and three regional associations representing the interests of thousands of design professionals from across the country, including Maryland, who provide professional engineering, architecture, and land surveying services in the development of the built environment in which we live. The services provided by these design professionals include the preparation of plans and specifications for public infrastructure, commercial development, and residential projects, “allowing Americans to drink clean water, enjoy a healthy life, take advantage of new technologies, and travel safely and efficiently.”1 The American Council of Engineering Companies of Maryland (“ACEC-MD”) is a nonprofit association representing over 90 consulting engineering firms located throughout the state that serve the public and private sectors. Member firms employ over 6,500 employees and are responsible for the design of most of the area’s infrastructure, including environmental and building construction. Founded in 1957, the organization promotes the business interests of the consulting engineering profession in Maryland and the surrounding region. 1 About ACEC, http://www.acec.org/about/ (last visited June 29, 2016). Founded in 1968, the American Council of Engineering Companies of Virginia (“ACEC-VA”) is the largest engineering firm association in Virginia. It represents the business interests of more than 90 consulting engineering firms which employ more than 4,000 employees. ACEC-VA actively advocates on behalf of its membership, and is a leader in promoting industry excellence and professionalism.
    [Show full text]