Ius quaesitum tertio
BOOK
Cite BOOK
Style
Schrage, E. (Ed.) (2008). Ius quaesitum tertio. Duncker & Humblot. https://doi.org/10.3790/978-3-428-52720-5
Schrage, Eltjo J. H.. Ius quaesitum tertio. Duncker & Humblot, 2008. Book. https://doi.org/10.3790/978-3-428-52720-5
Schrage, E (ed.) (2008): Ius quaesitum tertio, Duncker & Humblot, [online] https://doi.org/10.3790/978-3-428-52720-5
Format
Ius quaesitum tertio
Editors: Schrage, Eltjo J. H.
Comparative Studies in Continental and Anglo-American Legal History, Vol. 26
(2008)
Additional Information
Book Details
Pricing
Abstract
This volume is the third one in a series of publications composed by (more or less) the same academic working group. It follows the publications "Unjust Enrichment: The Comparative Legal History of the Law of Restitution" (1995, 2nd edition 1999 <978-3-428-07982-7>) and "Negligence: The Comparative Legal History of the Law of Torts" (2001 <978-3-428-10516-8).The authors of this volume focus on contracts in favour of third parties. They examine two distinct, but closely related topics: The unfolding and gradual withering away of the Roman law maxim Alteri stipulari non potest and (more general) the creation of contractual rights in favour of third parties. This too has its roots in Roman law, yet it developed a life of its own, remaining a highly controversial subject in modern European legal systems. Behind these themes arises the question of whether or not there is any rule restricting contracts to reciprocal relationship.
Table of Contents
| Section Title | Page | Action | Price |
|---|---|---|---|
| Table of Contents | V | ||
| DAVID J. IBBETSON and ELTJO J. H. SCHRAGE: Ius quaesitum tertio. A Comparative and Historical Introduction to the Concept of Third Party Contracts | 1 | ||
| Roman Law | 2 | ||
| Refusal of a Right of Action to Third Parties | 3 | ||
| Refusal of a Right of Action to the Stipulator | 6 | ||
| The Foundations of Mediaval Law | 7 | ||
| The Medieval Ius Commune | 7 | ||
| Iura Propria in the Middle Ages | 9 | ||
| The Early Modern Synthesis of Theory and Practice | 14 | ||
| Post-Grotius | 20 | ||
| England | 26 | ||
| The Modern Law | 29 | ||
| Common Themes | 32 | ||
| Generality and Specificity | 32 | ||
| Third-Party Rights and Other Legal Rules | 32 | ||
| Practice and Theory | 33 | ||
| SIR JOHN BAKER: Privity of Contract in the Common Law before 1680 | 35 | ||
| Formal contracts under seal | 38 | ||
| Accountability | 40 | ||
| Assumpsit | 41 | ||
| Appendix: Some cases summarised from the plea rolls | 57 | ||
| JAN HALLEBEEK: Ius Quaesitum Tertio in Medieval Roman Law | 61 | ||
| I. Introduction | 61 | ||
| II. Justinianic law | 64 | ||
| 1. The maxims of Roman law | 64 | ||
| a) alteri stipulari nemo potest | 64 | ||
| b) per extraneam personam nihil adquiri posse | 65 | ||
| c) neque stipulari neque emere vendere contrahere, ut alter suo nomine recte agat, possumus | 66 | ||
| 2. Exceptions to the basic rules | 67 | ||
| a) The promisee has an interest; the promisee has an action | 67 | ||
| b) Addition of a penalty clause; the promisee has an action | 69 | ||
| c) Specific exceptional cases where the third party has an action | 69 | ||
| III. The glossators | 73 | ||
| 1. The scholarly approach in general | 73 | ||
| 2. Listing the exceptions | 74 | ||
| 3. The doctrine of Martinus | 75 | ||
| 4. The mainstream glossators and the Accursian Gloss: Martinus’ doctrine rejected | 77 | ||
| 5. A general rule for the pact to restore the dowry to a third party | 79 | ||
| 6. The stipulatio mihi recipienti suo nomine | 81 | ||
| 7. The servus publicus in medieval context | 83 | ||
| 8. Conclusions | 84 | ||
| IV. The commentators | 85 | ||
| 1. General approach and cocial context | 85 | ||
| 2. Extending the number of cases where the third party beneficiary has an action | 85 | ||
| a) The son under paternal control and the curator in medieval context | 86 | ||
| b) The servus publicus in medieval context | 86 | ||
| c) The donatio sub modo | 89 | ||
| d) The pactum appositum in rei traditione | 93 | ||
| 3. Extending the number of cases where the stipulatio alteri has effect for the parties themselves | 97 | ||
| a) Bartolus: the third party as procurator ad recipiendum and the interesse superveniens | 97 | ||
| b) The formula mihi recipienti suo nomine | 99 | ||
| c) A natural obligation confirmed by oath | 101 | ||
| V. Conclusions | 104 | ||
| HARRY DONDORP: Ius Quaesitum Tertio in Medieval Canon Law | 109 | ||
| I. Introduction | 109 | ||
| II. Agency acknowledged? | 111 | ||
| III. Agency rejected | 112 | ||
| IV. Contracts in favour of a third party acknowledged? | 114 | ||
| V. Three different interpretations of Laurentius’s gloss | 115 | ||
| VI. New law with regard to third party rights | 116 | ||
| VII. Contracts in favour of a third rejected | 117 | ||
| VIII. An Alternative: a promise under oath | 119 | ||
| IX. An alternative remedy: denuntiatio | 122 | ||
| X. Contracts in favour of a third party acknowledged? | 124 | ||
| XI. Promises directed to an absent promisee | 127 | ||
| XII. Conclusions | 130 | ||
| Epilogue | 131 | ||
| NEIL G. JONES: Aspects of Privity in England: Equity to 1680 | 135 | ||
| I. The Dutton v. Poole-type cases | 135 | ||
| 1. The cases | 136 | ||
| 2. The basis for relief | 142 | ||
| a) Sambrooke v. Ramsey: a mixed approach | 142 | ||
| b) Lord Nottingham’s cases: agreement | 144 | ||
| c) Lord Nottingham’s cases: reliance | 146 | ||
| d) Lord Nottingham’s cases: trust | 147 | ||
| II. The marriage agreement cases | 150 | ||
| 1. Fifteenth-century marriage agreements | 150 | ||
| 2. Covenants to stand seised | 151 | ||
| 3. Seventeenth-century marriage agreements | 154 | ||
| a) Agreement | 154 | ||
| b) Trust | 158 | ||
| III. The ‘Trust of a Promise’ | 159 | ||
| IV. Trusts as contracts? | 162 | ||
| 1. Unilateral trust | 164 | ||
| 2. Consent | 168 | ||
| 3. Conscience and justified reliance | 170 | ||
| V. Conclusion | 172 | ||
| LAURENT WAELKENS: Ius Quaesitum Tertio, Dutch Influences on Grotius | 175 | ||
| DAVID J. IBBETSON and WARREN SWAIN: Third Party Beneficiaries in English Law: From Dutton v. Poole to Tweddle v. Atkinson | 191 | ||
| Sealed Deeds and the Parties-only Rule | 192 | ||
| The Action of Assumpsit | 196 | ||
| The Law Merchant | 200 | ||
| Equity | 201 | ||
| The Rule under Pressure | 205 | ||
| DAVID DEROUSSIN: La stipulation pour autruide l’ancien droit français au XIXème siècle, ou comment se débarrasser d’une tradition gênante | 215 | ||
| I. Les actes pour autrui dans le droit coutumier médiéval français | 219 | ||
| II. Les hésitations tardives de l’ancien droit français | 222 | ||
| 1. Le fondement de la prohibition | 222 | ||
| 2. Les tempéraments à la prohibition | 224 | ||
| III. Audace jurisprudentielle et doctrinale sous l’empire du Code civil | 228 | ||
| 1. Les dispositions du Code | 228 | ||
| 2. Restrictions doctrinales et jurisprudentielles au principe de la prohibition (XIX–XXème s.) | 229 | ||
| 3. L’analyse de la nature juridique de la stipulation pour autrui | 231 | ||
| a) La prohibition de la stipulation pour autrui, entre protection du consentement et objet du contrat | 231 | ||
| aa) Le consentement et la présomption de porte fort | 231 | ||
| bb) La recherche d’un autre fondement | 235 | ||
| b) La situation juridique du tiers bénéficiaire de la stipulation | 237 | ||
| aa) La théorie de l’offre | 237 | ||
| bb) Le recours aux règles de la gestion d’affaires | 240 | ||
| 4. La faveur envers la stipulation pour autrui | 244 | ||
| a) La recherche de moyens de validation des actes pour autrui | 244 | ||
| b) Quelques exemples de stipulations pour autrui valables | 246 | ||
| MARTIN PENNITZ: Ius quaesitum tertio: German Legal Doctrine and Practice in the 18th and 19th Century | 251 | ||
| I. Introduction | 251 | ||
| II. Attempts to establish rights of third parties from the late 17th century | 254 | ||
| III. „Case law” in the territories based on the ius commune and German customary law | 263 | ||
| IV. Territorial Law Codes and the legal practice based on these codifications | 268 | ||
| V. Legal doctrine and practice during the second half of the 19th century | 275 | ||
| VI. The formation of a “real” third party beneficiary contract in the course of the Drafting Process of the German Civil Code (BGB) | 283 | ||
| VII. Conclusion | 285 | ||
| MARTIN J. SCHERMAIER: Contracts for the Benefit of a Third Party in German Law | 289 | ||
| I. The German approach | 289 | ||
| 1. “. . . that the third party acquires the right directly” | 289 | ||
| 2. Differences between agency, assignment and delegation | 291 | ||
| 3. Agency and contracts for the benefit of third parties | 292 | ||
| II. Modern practice and its history | 293 | ||
| 1. Cases of § 328 BGB | 293 | ||
| a) Insurance contracts | 293 | ||
| b) Maintenance contracts | 295 | ||
| c) Trusts | 295 | ||
| d) Savings accounts in the name of third parties | 296 | ||
| e) Quality assurance and product liability | 298 | ||
| f) Contract for the carriage of goods | 299 | ||
| g) Other contracts | 300 | ||
| 2. The remnants of the Ius Commune tradition | 301 | ||
| a) Assignment theory | 301 | ||
| b) Affirmation theory | 303 | ||
| III. New horizons: the contract with protective effect for third parties | 306 | ||
| 1. Obligation to perform and third party protection | 306 | ||
| 2. The rise and fall of the “weal and woe” case law | 309 | ||
| 3. The floodgates burst open . . . | 311 | ||
| 4. The expert opinion cases | 313 | ||
| 5. The theoretical basis of third party protection | 314 | ||
| a) Weaknesses of tort law | 314 | ||
| b) The expansion of contract law | 315 | ||
| c) A “third way” of imposing liability in German law? | 317 | ||
| 6. Third party protection in the absence of third party rights: the realisation of third party loss | 320 | ||
| IV. Individual questions | 322 | ||
| 1. Claims for breach of contract? | 322 | ||
| 2. Rescission of a contract for the benefit of third parties | 323 | ||
| 3. The effect on third parties of limitation clauses | 326 | ||
| V. Epilogue | 329 | ||
| Provisions on Third Party Rights in the BGB | 329 | ||
| WARREN SWAIN: Third Party Beneficiaries in English Law, 1880 – 2004 | 331 | ||
| Dunlop v. Selfridge and the confirmation of the privity rule | 332 | ||
| The parties only rule and the law of contract | 333 | ||
| Privity of contract reasserted | 336 | ||
| The growing list of exceptions | 339 | ||
| The parties only rule and the law of tort | 343 | ||
| The parties only rule and the law of property | 349 | ||
| Reform of the privity rule | 352 | ||
| Concluding remarks | 355 | ||
| HECTOR L. MACQUEEN and W. DAVID H. SELLAR: Scots Law: Ius quaesitum tertio, Promise and Irrevocability | 357 | ||
| Stair and earlier developments | 357 | ||
| Stair’s Institutions | 357 | ||
| Canon law and Scots law before Stair | 361 | ||
| After Stair | 369 | ||
| Kames | 369 | ||
| The nineteenth century | 372 | ||
| The Sandeman analysis: irrevocability a condition of a third party right? | 374 | ||
| The view of Gloag in 1914 | 375 | ||
| Carmichael v. Carmichael’s Executrix | 376 | ||
| a) The facts | 376 | ||
| b) The House of Lords: Dunedin v Stair | 377 | ||
| The neo-civilian counter-attack | 380 | ||
| Conclusion | 383 | ||
| EDGAR DU PERRON: Third Party Stipulations in Modern Dutch Law | 385 | ||
| Introduction | 385 | ||
| Burden on the third party | 388 | ||
| Legal basis | 388 | ||
| Agreement between the parties | 389 | ||
| Unknown and non-existent beneficiary | 389 | ||
| Acceptance | 389 | ||
| Revocation | 391 | ||
| Effects | 392 | ||
| DANIEL VISSER and SAMANTHA COOK: Contracts for the Benefit of Third Parties in South Africa – Investigating an Alternative Approach | 395 | ||
| Introduction | 395 | ||
| I. The Nature of Contracts for the Benefit of Third Parties | 396 | ||
| 1. When Does the Right of the Third Party Arise? | 398 | ||
| 2. How, When and by Whom can the Third Party’s Right be Enforced; and When and under What Circumstances can the Right be Revoked or Varied? | 402 | ||
| 3. Do Corresponding Obligations Arise from the Contract for the Benefit of a Third Party and, if so, When do these Arise? | 405 | ||
| II. Evaluating the Current State of the Law | 406 | ||
| III. An Alternative Approach – Reasonable Expectations | 407 | ||
| IV. Typical Cases | 410 | ||
| 1. Insurance | 410 | ||
| 2. Himalaya Clauses | 416 | ||
| 3. Pre-Incorporation Contracts | 422 | ||
| 4. Trusts inter vivos | 427 | ||
| Conclusion | 432 |