- This topic has 2 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by
.
- Posts
Q:1)Anna agreed with Helen that Ben, Anna’s son, would provide English lessons to John, Helen’s son, in exchange for a fixed fee. Ben provided the lessons to John but was never paid the fixed fee.
Which of the following is correct?
A Anna may claim the agreed fee from John
B Ben may claim the agreed fee from Anna
C Ben may claim the agreed fee from John
D Ben has no contractual basis on which to recover the agreed feeHow is answer B? Kindly explain.
151 Which of the following statements about the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 is NOT correct?
A lf a third party has rights under the Act the original parties to the contract cannot agree to vary
its terms without the consent of the third party
B The third party must be identified by name for him to be able to enforce the terms
C The third party must be in existence when the contract was madeThe answer needs to be C because bpp clearly says a third party can be an unborn child/future spouse so need not to be in existence. But B can also be right because third party must be identified either by name, description or class.
The answer in book is B, but it seems wrong HELPPPP.There is a contract between Anna and Helen. Neither Ben nor John is in any contractual situation. So I’m leaning heavily towards D.
You tell me that the solution is B. That would constitute a family contract (mother and son) so there would need to be strong evidence of intention to create legal relations. In addition, there’s no mention of any agreement reached between Anna and Ben whereby Ben has agreed with his mother to be his manager / arranger.
I’m not happy with the solution B – my preference would be option D
Sorry!
In answer to your part (b) (please post separate questions separately!), an unborn child DOES exist! You need to differentiate between a child that is still within the mother’s womb and a child that arrives in 4 years’ time.
A viable foetus is an unborn child whereas a twinkle in a father’s eye isn’t.
An as-yet-unborn foetus IS in existence in the same way that a yet-to-be-married fiance is in existence.
OK?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.