Agency, Assignation and third party rights Flashcards Preview

Godrey's Contract Lectures; Breach, Damages, JQT, Illegality, Frustration etc > Agency, Assignation and third party rights > Flashcards

Flashcards in Agency, Assignation and third party rights Deck (20):

res inter alios acta aliis non nocet prodest

The privity of contract ... literally ... 'a thing done between others does not harm or benefit others'



general process for the transfer of incorporeal property rights ie. debt.

X lends Tom £300
X wants the money back before it's due
X sells the debt to Y for £280
-- Y gets profit and X gets the money sooner



The old name for assignation



The person who is giving the rights away



The person who is receiving the rights



The person who can demand something



The person who can be demanded something of


Henderson v Robb 1889

Authority for privity of contract


Process of Assignation (3 points)

1. Agreement to assign (i.e. a contract)
2. Assignation (i.e. conveyance, i.e. deed of transfer plus delivery of deed to assignee)
3. Intimation to debtor (effects transfer of right)


Definition of Assignation (5 points)

-- transfer of rights, not liabilities
-- does not require consent of debtor
-- not effective until intimation of the assignation to the debtor
-- defences: assignatus utitur jure auctoris
-- prohibitions on assignation - contract term; deletes personae


Slattadale Ltd v Tilbury Homes (Scotland) Ltd, 1997

A claim for damages may be assigned, such as a claim for damages for breach of contract


Aurdal v Estrella 1916

Spanish company sold ship to Swedish company - Spanish King issued order saying that Spanish people weren't allowed to sell Spanish ships to foreigners - Spanyards wanted to withdraw - Swedes didn't, the ship had increased in value by a great deal - Swedes assigned the right to receive the ship to another Spanish company so that there was no contravention of the law


Delectus personae

the choice of a particular person


Cole v Handasyde & Co 1910

Whether an obligation stipulated in a contract is assignable or not depends upon whether there is an element of delectus personae in it


Scottish Homes v Inverclyde 1997 (3-part test for deletes personae)

1. The particular selection of an individual to perform personally certain specified services
2. In circumstances in which the identification of an individual with the services implies a linkage so peculiar
3. That no form of substitution of performance could be within contemplation.

--Housing Authority -- put out a tender for technical repairs -- the company sub-contracted -- was found that the fact that the company had put out tenders and had been selected to do highly technical work meant that deletes personae was a feature of the contract


James Scott v Apollo Engineering 2000

Limits on assignation - contractual prohibition

"The sub-contractor shall not assign the benefit of the sub-contract nor sublet the whole or any part of the sub-contract works without the prior written consent of [the pursuers]"


Assignatus utitur jure auctoris


X buys a car, taks out a loan to do so
The debt is assigned
The car turns out to be faulty
Liability for the faulty car has not been transferred - the original debtor must still be held accountable


Jus quaesitum tertio (4 points)

- Cannot impose an obligation upon 3rd party without their consent
- can confer a benefit on a 3rd party
- under JQT the 3rd party acquires AN ENFORCEABLE RIGHT
- the 3rd party can sue to enforce their contractual rights ( Alfred McAlpine Construction Ltd v Panatown Ltd [2001] )


Carmichael v Carmichael's Exx 1920 (3-part test)

1. There must be an intention by the contracting parties to confer a right upon the 3rd party
2. The right must have been intended to be irrevocable
3. The 3rd party must be clearly identified as individual or class of persons


Alfred McAlpine Construction Ltd v Panatown Ltd [2001]

A third party, that had been conferred with rights in the contract, sued in order to enforce those rights