Tweddle v Atkinson [1861]

Court: Queen's Bench

Facts: John Tweddle and William Guy entered into an agreement where they each promised to pay sums of money to the other's son. William Tweddle, John Tweddle’s son, was engaged to Guy’s daughter. William Guy passed away before making the payment, and John Tweddle also died before suing for the money. William Tweddle then sued Mr. Atkinson, the executor of Guy’s estate, for the promised £200.

Issue: Can a person who is not a party to a contract enforce it if the contract was made for their benefit?

Held: The court held that William Tweddle could not enforce the contract. As a stranger to the consideration, he had no legal standing to sue. The court emphasized the doctrine of privity of contract, stating that only parties to the contract can enforce its terms. Additionally, consideration must flow from the promisee, which did not occur in this case.

Key Judicial Statement: "A person who is a stranger to the consideration cannot sue upon a contract, even if it is made for their benefit."

💡Leveluplaw: This case is a landmark in contract law, reinforcing the doctrine of privity and the requirement of consideration. It highlights how contractual rights and obligations are confined to the contracting parties, limiting the enforceability of promises made for third-party beneficiaries.