Chapter 13: MCQs

. William Tweddle was unable to sue in Tweddle v Atkinson:

because he was not mentioned in the contract.

because there was no consideration for the promise to pay him.

because he did not provide consideration.

because he was not a party to the contract.

. The first fundamental principle stated by Viscount Haldane in Dunlop v Selfridge is that 'only a person who is ……… a contract can sue on it'.

. Dunlop could have succeeded against Selfridge if it could have shown that Dew was acting as its agent when Selfridge promised Dew that it would not sell below list price.

True

False

. Mrs Beswick was able to enforce the promise to pay her £5 per week because:

she was the widow of the contracting party and the court had sympathy for her.

it would have been inequitable for John Beswick to get the business without having to pay the full price.

she could get specific performance of the contract as the administrator of her deceased husband's estate.

the court considered that this was the most appropriate way in which damages could be paid.

. The damages awarded by Lord Denning in Jackson v Horizon Holidays were:

held to be unjustified by the House of Lords in Woodar v Wimpey.

approved of as illustrating a general principle that, where A contracts for the benefit of B, A can recover all that B would have recovered had the contract been made with B himself.

approved as representing Mr Jackson's own loss.

approved as an example of a special category of contracts calling for special treatment.

. The decision of the House of Lords in Panatown means that the original owner of a building under a building contract is no longer able to recover damages for defects from the builder on behalf of subsequent purchasers, or even in their own right as representing their own loss.

True

False

. It is possible to bypass the privity rule, both by the doctrine of agency and the device of a collateral contract, but in both cases, it is still necessary to show that the promisee provided ……….

. Under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999:

Tweddle v Atkinson would not now be decided any differently, because the Act says nothing about the rule that consideration must move from the promissee.

William Tweddle would now rely on s. 1(1)a) in order to sue.

William Tweddle would now rely on s. 1(1)b) in order to sue.

William Tweddle would be precluded from suing, because of s. 1(2).

. Under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, the widow in Beswick v Beswick would be able to sue:

in her own right, under s. 1(1)(a).

in her own right, under s. 1(1)(b).

in her capacity as administrator of her husband's estate, under s. 1(1)(a).

In her capacity as administrator of her husband's estate, under s. 1(1)(b).

. A promises B that he will pay the tuition fees of C, B's daughter, at University, over the next three years, in return for B allowing A exclusive use of B's sports car over that period. After 12 months and having paid the first year's tuition fee, A decides he no longer wants to keep the sports car and returns it to B. Which of the following statements are correct? Please select all that apply.

A can refuse to pay the remaining fees only if he can legally terminate his contract with A, e.g. because the car has become roadworthy.

Even if the car is in pristine condition, A is safe in the knowledge that he need not pay if B agrees to accept the return of the car and, in return, to release him from the contract.

B cannot release A from the contract if A knows that C has relied on the contract (unless there is an express term in the contract entitling A and B to rescind or vary without C's consent).

B cannot release A from the contract if C has communicated to A her assent to his undertaking to pay her fees (unless there is an express term in the contract entitling A and B to rescind or vary without C's consent).

. Lockett v Charles was an early case of a contracting party, who had booked a meal on behalf of another (his wife), being allowed to claim damages on her behalf and was picked up by Lord Denning in Jackson v Horizon Holidays to award damages to Mr Jackson to include his family's disappointment.

True

False

. The disadvantage of the trust of a promise device was its lack of flexibility in that it made the promise ……….

. Very exceptionally, as was demonstrated in the case of White v Jones, the law of ……… has been used effectively to enable a third party to enforce a contractual obligation.

Chapter 13: MCQs

Quiz Content