19. Third Party Liability

2019 ◽  
pp. 924-972
Author(s):  
Paul S Davies ◽  
Graham Virgo
Keyword(s):  
Third Party ◽  
The Third ◽  
Personal A ◽  
Academic Debate

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter focuses its discussion on personal claims, where the claimant seeks a sum of money from the defendant but does not assert any right to any particular property. However, even where the defendant is solvent and could satisfy a personal claim, a proprietary claim might often be more desirable. If the property has risen in value, then that uplift in value will necessarily benefit the claimant if the claim is proprietary, but not if the claim is personal. A personal claim for the value of the property at the time of the third party’s wrong might be preferred where the property has fallen in value. Moreover, a personal claim will be the only possible type of claim available to the claimant if the property in question has been dissipated and no longer exists. In such circumstances, a proprietary claim is impossible and a personal claim alone can be pursued.

European rules on the law applicable to third-party effects of assignments: a never-ending story?

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 633-648
Author(s):  
Eva-Maria Kieninger
Keyword(s):  
Third Party ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Third Party ◽  
Academic Debate

Abstract The proper conflicts rule on the third-party effects of assignments of claims is again on the agenda of the European legislator after attempts to regulate it in the 2009 Rome Regulation had failed. Since that time, divergent national enactments and decisions by Member States' courts as well as a vigorous academic debate have not made the task easier. The article tries to explore some of the practical and theoretical difficulties, which the European legislator is facing, as well as possible ways to cut the Gordian knot.

Resolving tension from the third-party forgiveness effect

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaclyn M. Moloney ◽  
Chelsea A. Reid ◽  
Jody L. Davis ◽  
Jeni L. Burnette ◽  
Jeffrey D. Green
Keyword(s):  
Third Party ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Third Party

Issues in security and privacy of big data

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (12) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Shaveta Bhatia
Keyword(s):  
Cloud Computing ◽  
Big Data ◽  
Approximate Method ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Cyber Security ◽  
Data Science ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Security And Privacy ◽  
Security Threats ◽  
The Third

 The epoch of the big data presents many opportunities for the development in the range of data science, biomedical research cyber security, and cloud computing. Nowadays the big data gained popularity.  It also invites many provocations and upshot in the security and privacy of the big data. There are various type of threats, attacks such as leakage of data, the third party tries to access, viruses and vulnerability that stand against the security of the big data. This paper will discuss about the security threats and their approximate method in the field of biomedical research, cyber security and cloud computing.

Brokering Peace in Nuclear Environments

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moeed Yusuf
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Bargaining Theory ◽  
The Third ◽  
China And India ◽  
International Setting ◽  
Multiple Audiences ◽  
Crisis Behavior ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Shed Light

This book is the first to theorize third party mediation in crises between regional nuclear powers. Its relevance flows from two of the most significant international developments since the end of the Cold War: the emergence of regional nuclear rivalries; and the shift from the Cold War’s bipolar context to today’s unipolar international setting. Moving away from the traditional bilateral deterrence models, the book conceptualizes crisis behavior as “brokered bargaining”: a three-way bargaining framework where the regional rivals and the ‘third party’ seek to influence each other to behave in line with their crisis objectives and in so doing, affect each other’s crisis behavior. The book tests brokered bargaining theory by examining U.S.-led crisis management in South Asia, analyzing three major crises between India and Pakistan: the Kargil conflict, 1999; the 2001-02 nuclear standoff; and the Mumbai crisis, 2008. The case studies find strong evidence of behavior predicted by the brokered bargaining framework. They also shed light on several risks of misperceptions and inadvertence due to the challenges inherent in signaling to multiple audiences simultaneously. Traditional explanations rooted in bilateral deterrence models do not account for these, leaving a void with serious practical consequences, which the introduction of brokered bargaining seeks to fill. The book’s findings also offer lessons for crises on the Korean peninsula, between China and India, and between potential nuclear rivals in the Middle East.

Relaxations of Contractual Privity and the Need for Third Party Rights in Chinese Contract Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chen Lei
Keyword(s):  
Direct Action ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Chinese Law ◽  
The Third ◽  
Right Of Action ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Third Party ◽  
The Right

This chapter examines the position of third party beneficiaries in Chinese law. Article 64 of the Chinese Contract Law states that where a contract for the benefit of a third party is breached, the debtor is liable to the creditor. The author regards this as leaving unanswered the question of whether the thirdparty has a right of direct action against the debtor. One view regards the third party as having the right to sue for the benefit although this right was ultimately excluded from the law. Another view, supported by the Supreme People’s Court, is that Article 64 does not provide a right of action for a third party and merely prescribes performance in ‘incidental’ third party contracts. The third view is that there is a third party right of action in cases of ‘genuine’ third party contracts but courts are unlikely to recognize a third party action where the contract merely purports to confer a benefit on the third party.

Formation of Contract and Third Parties in Cambodia

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ly Tayseng
Keyword(s):  
Academic Writing ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The Third ◽  
Contract Formation ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Formal Requirements

This chapter gives an overview of the law on contract formation and third party beneficiaries in Cambodia. Much of the discussion is tentative since the new Cambodian Civil Code only entered into force from 21 December 2011 and there is little case law and academic writing fleshing out its provisions. The Code owes much to the Japanese Civil Code of 1898 and, like the latter, does not have a requirement of consideration and seldom imposes formal requirements but there are a few statutory exceptions from the principle of freedom from form. For a binding contract, the agreement of the parties is required and the offer must be made with the intention to create a legally binding obligation and becomes effective once it reaches the offeree. The new Code explicitly provides that the parties to the contract may agree to confer a right arising under the contract upon a third party. This right accrues directly from their agreement; it is not required that the third party declare its intention to accept the right.

Contracts for the Benefit of Third Parties Under the Taiwan Civil Code

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheng-Lin JAN
Keyword(s):  
Civil Code ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The Third ◽  
Legal Relationship ◽  
The Third Party ◽  
Privity Of Contract

This chapter discusses the position of third party beneficiaries in Taiwan law where the principle of privity of contract is well established. Article 269 of the Taiwan Civil Code confers a right on the third party to sue for performance as long as the parties have at least impliedly agreed. This should be distinguished from a ‘spurious contract’ for the benefit of third parties where there is no agreement to permit the third party to claim. Both the aggrieved party and the third party beneficiary can sue on the contract, but only for its own loss. The debtor can only set off on a counterclaim arising from its legal relationship with the third party. Where the third party coerces the debtor into the contract, the contract can be avoided, but where the third party induces the debtor to contract with the creditor by misrepresentation, the debtor can only avoid the contract if the creditor knows or ought to have known of the misrepresentation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document