In BPP study text, there are a number of exceptions to privity of contract is mentioned. One of them is foreseeable loss to the third party, and the example case is Linden Gardens Trust Ltd v Lenesta Sludge DIsposals Ltd.
It is perfectly in line with privity of contract and i didnt find it as an exception.both the defendant and claimant are in contract itself, so i dont get their logic.
SIr Mike, any help appreciated.
Read the case again! The “proper” plaintiff, the one who has suffered, is the subsequent purchaser. But that subsequent purchaser doesn’t have a claim under privity of contract because the work was not done under a contract with that subsequent purchaser. And Linden Gardens didn’t suffer, because they had sold the property. But, because the subsequent sale was in the contemplation of both parties, Linden was able to sue on behalf of the innocent third party purchaser.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.