141:, privity is said to preclude a party to a legal action from raising an issue that either was raised or could have been raised in previous legal action. Under federal law, "concepts summarized by the term privity are looked to as a means of determining whether the interests of the party against whom
149:
is "a convenient means of expressing conclusions that are supported by independent analysis." Because privity is actually a term to summarize a conclusion that one party was precluded, it "may exist for the purpose of determining one legal question but not another depending on the circumstances and
54:
dictates that persons may not reap the benefits nor suffer the burdens of a contract to which they were not a party. Under the doctrine, if a consumer bought goods from a retailer who had originally bought them from the manufacturer, then, if the goods proved faulty, the consumer should sue the
55:
retailer. The consumer could not sue the manufacturer in contract law because no contract existed between them. The retailer could then counterclaim against the manufacturer. In most cases, however, consumers may rely on the manufacturer's guarantee that will have been
106:
73:
246:
97:
28:, these relationships and obligations now fall within the scope of modern statutory laws, diminishing its relevance to modern proceedings.
251:
79:
However, the doctrine has not been completely abolished. In particular the question arises as to whether a third party (such as an
112:
24:
is a common law doctrine that governed the liability and obligations of contracting parties. Once an important concept in
76:, which allows non-party beneficiaries of a contract to enforce the contract, substantially modifying the doctrine.
95:) may rely upon an exemption clause limiting liability in a contact between two others. The matter was addressed in
169:
188:
159:
102:
202:
43:
37:
25:
146:
64:
164:
92:
142:
56:
119:
51:
69:
240:
68:
EWHC J57 (QB), but this case immediately revealed the limits of the doctrine and two
137:
84:
47:
88:
145:
is asserted were represented in prior litigation." Therefore, privity in
80:
132:
72:
reports proposed reform. Finally, English law was amended by the
192:, 333 U.S. 591, 597, 68 S. Ct. 715, 719, 92 L.Ed. 898 (1948).
105:
gave guidelines which were subsequently followed in
123:1 QB 158 also shed light on this area of law.
8:
74:Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999
62:In England, the leading privity case was
180:
108:New Zealand Shipping v Sattersthwaite
7:
207:, 56 F.3d 343, 346 (2nd Cir. 1995).
14:
219:, 908 F.2d 1262 (5th Cir. 1990).
247:Legal doctrines and principles
1:
217:Meza v. General Battery Corp.
98:Scruttons v Midland Silicones
150:legal doctrines at issue."
268:
35:
252:United States federal law
205:, N.A. v. Celotex Corp.
170:Third party beneficiary
189:Commissioner v. Sunnen
160:Privity in English law
111:UKPC 1. The cases of
229:Chase Manhattan Bank
203:Chase Manhattan Bank
114:Norwich CC v Harvey
38:Privity of contract
147:federal common law
65:Tweddle v Atkinson
231:, 56 F.3d at 346.
165:Privity of estate
93:freight forwarder
42:The principle of
259:
232:
226:
220:
214:
208:
199:
193:
185:
143:claim preclusion
267:
266:
262:
261:
260:
258:
257:
256:
237:
236:
235:
227:
223:
215:
211:
200:
196:
186:
182:
178:
156:
129:
120:Adler v Dickson
52:law of contract
40:
34:
17:
12:
11:
5:
265:
263:
255:
254:
249:
239:
238:
234:
233:
221:
209:
194:
179:
177:
174:
173:
172:
167:
162:
155:
152:
133:US federal law
128:
127:US federal law
125:
117:1 WLR 828 and
101:UKHL 4, where
70:Law Commission
36:Main article:
33:
30:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
264:
253:
250:
248:
245:
244:
242:
230:
225:
222:
218:
213:
210:
206:
204:
198:
195:
191:
190:
184:
181:
175:
171:
168:
166:
163:
161:
158:
157:
153:
151:
148:
144:
140:
139:
134:
126:
124:
122:
121:
116:
115:
110:
109:
104:
100:
99:
94:
90:
86:
82:
77:
75:
71:
67:
66:
60:
58:
53:
49:
45:
39:
31:
29:
27:
23:
22:
228:
224:
216:
212:
201:
197:
187:
183:
138:res judicata
136:
130:
118:
113:
107:
96:
78:
63:
61:
41:
32:Contract law
26:contract law
20:
19:
18:
241:Categories
176:References
48:common law
16:Legal term
103:Lord Reid
89:stevedore
59:to them.
154:See also
81:employee
57:assigned
131:In the
46:in the
44:privity
21:Privity
91:, or
85:agent
135:of
50:'s
243::
87:,
83:,
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.