And unless the FTC or some agency brings an action- Well they don't have power.
|
|
For example, in the Commonwealth of Virginia, where a party brings an action, and then declares a nonsuit, the statute of limitations is extended for six months.
|
|
McKendrick (2007) p.154 If the promisee brings an action against the promisor and wins, any damages paid to the third party in a subsequent action must take the previous damages paid to the promisee into account. If the third party brings an action, and the promisee does so afterwards then the promisee cannot claim any damages. This is because the Law Commission felt that if the third party claimed compensation for the breach, the promisee would have no interest in the dispute any more.
|
|
This fails to take into account situations where the promisee has suffered personal loss from the breach of contract. If the promisee brings an action first then the third party is prohibited from doing so, unless the promisee's action fails, in which case the third party is free to pursue his own claim.
|
|
Art brings an action for replevin against Burt, seeking to recover a bicycle. In support for the action, Art presents evidence that Cathy is in fact the true owner of the bicycle in question, not Burt. A US court would reject Art’s jus tertii argument for replevin because he has failed to show that he has a more legitimate interest in the bike than Burt.
|
|
The childlike Lummox is perceived to be a neighborhood nuisance and, upon leaving the Stuart property one day, causes substantial property damage across the city of Westville. John's widowed mother wants him to get rid of it, and brings an action in the local court to have it destroyed. Desperate to save his pet, John Thomas considers selling Lummox to a zoo. He rapidly changes his mind and runs away from home, riding into the nearby wilderness on Lummox's back.
|
|
The traces of the law relating to assumpsit are still felt today, particularly in the law of contract and unjust enrichment. For example, consideration is only necessary in relation to simple contracts. Where a claimant brings an action in contract for non-performance of a promise contained in a deed, there is no need to show that the claimant supplied consideration for the promise. The reason for this is historical: where there was no deed, the correct action was assumpsit for nonfeasance; in the latter, in debt sur obligation.
|
|
An added benefit is that if a claimant brings an action for debt, she or he will have no further duty to mitigate his loss. This was another requirement that common law courts had invented, before a claim for breach of contract could be enforced. For instance, in contracts for services that spanned a long period of time (e.g. 5 years), the courts would often state that because a claimant should be able to find alternative work in a few months, and so should not receive money for the whole contract's duration.
|
|
The Court held 8-0 (Marshall not participating) that full attorney's fees should generally be recoverable, based on the intent and practical effect of the law. The Court wrote: : When a plaintiff brings an action under that Title, he cannot recover damages. If he obtains an injunction, he does so not for himself alone, but also as a "private attorney general," vindicating a policy that Congress considered of the highest priority. If successful plaintiffs were routinely forced to bear their own attorneys' fees, few aggrieved parties would be in a position to advance the public interest by invoking the injunctive powers of the federal courts.
|
|
Section 3 covers the defences available to the promisor if the third party brings an action against him. In a dispute between the promisor and the third party over a term, the promisor can rely on any defence he would have if the dispute was with the promisee, as long as the defence is applicable to the term under dispute.Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 S.3(2) The Law Commission directly rejected the suggestion that the promisor should have every defence in a dispute with a third party that he would have in a dispute with the promisee (regardless of whether or not it could be applied to the disputed term).Andrews (2001) p.
|
|
A wrongful life claim is one in which a child plaintiff brings an action against a doctor who negligently diagnosed the plaintiff's mother. Usually, the doctor failed to diagnose rubella during the first trimester, for which there is no cure and which will inevitably cause profound disabilities in the unborn child. Had the mother been correctly diagnosed, she would have exercised her legal right to abortion.. In May 2006, the majority of the High Court rejected wrongful life, refusing to accept that life can be considered a compensable harm. This means that children who are born disabled as a result of a doctor's (admitted) negligence cannot claim damages.. Parents are able to pursue 'wrongful birth' claims if the child (disabled or not) is the outcome of a negligently performed sterilisation procedure.. However, since the Civil Liability Act, they cannot recover the costs of raising the child in New South Wales..
|
|