165:
252:
63:
22:
1081:, which provides that a contract cannot impose obligations or confer rights on a non-contracting party. However, in circumstances where a collateral contract is established between a third party and one of the contracting parties, the Court may allow rights or impose obligations on the non-contracting party, as illustrated in the earlier tortious case of
1035:
A collateral contract, if forged between the same parties as the main contract, must not contradict the main contract. That is, if the term was agreed upon prior to the completion of the formal contract (but was still included as a term, and could not be executed until completion of the second term),
980:
It can also be epitomized as follows: a collateral contract is one that induces a person to enter into a separate "primary" contract. For example, if X agrees to buy goods from Y that will, accordingly, be manufactured by Z, and does so on the strength of Z's assurance as to the high quality of the
976:
of the party for whose benefit the contract operates agreeing to enter into the principal or main contract, which sets out additional terms relating to the same subject matter as the main contract. For example, a collateral contract is formed when one party pays the other party a certain sum for
1120:, it was held that an auctioneer and a buyer had formed a collateral contract. It was held that even though the main contract does not involve the auctioneer, benefits given to the auctioneer for increasing the price of a bid constitutes a good consideration.
1060:. There are in fact three different entities participating in the letter of credit transaction: the seller, the buyer, and the banker. Therefore, a letter of credit theoretically fits as a collateral contract accepted by conduct, or in other words, an
1001:
A collateral contract is one where the parties to one contract enter into or promise to enter into another contract. Thus, the two contracts are connected and it may be enforced even though it forms no constructive part of the original contract. In
1010:
1129:, a landlord has promised orally not to exercise the right to termination in the principal contract if tenant signed the contract; landlord ended up terminating the main contract, whereas tenant's appeal was dismissed by the Court.
1106:. Practically, it is rare to find collateral contract as an exception as it must be strictly proved; and the burden of proof is only eased if the subject matter with which the main contract deals is more unusual.
1022:
The promisor must have expressly or impliedly requested about the main contract and his promissory statement must have intended to induce the entry of the other party into the main contract. According to
513:
1014:
a statement by a landlord made to intending tenants when negotiating a lease that they would be “looked after at renewal time”, would not bind the landlord to offer a further five year lease.
989:
A party to an existing contract may attempt to show that a collateral contract exists if their claim for a breach of contract fails because the statement they relied upon was not held to be a
1004:
993:
of the main contract. It has been held that for this to be successful, the statement must have been promissory in nature. Remedies may be awarded for breach of a collateral contract.
981:
goods, X and Z may be held to have made a collateral contract consisting of Z's promise of quality given in consideration of X's promise to enter into the main contract with Y.
1125:
518:
1027:, a collateral contract is held binding "when a person gives a promise, or an assurance to another, intending that he should act on it by entering into a contract'.
1056:
the cause of a letter of credit is that a bank issue a credit in favor of a seller to release the buyer of his obligation to pay directly to the seller with
1036:
the first term will still be allowed. Essentially the collateral contracts cannot contradict any element of the main contract nor the rights created by it.
786:
891:
3 Historically restricted in common law jurisdictions but generally accepted elsewhere; availability varies between contemporary common law jurisdictions
732:
781:
906:
473:
175:
720:
127:
99:
1242:
951:
924:
106:
80:
35:
227:
209:
146:
113:
49:
537:
501:
1146:
95:
530:
84:
1024:
796:
386:
281:
1102:, meaning that admissible evidence of a collateral contract can be used to exclude the operation of the
977:
entry into another contract. A collateral contract may be between one of the parties and a third party.
944:
816:
542:
895:
791:
750:
662:
1052:
because letters of credit are prompted by the buyer’s necessity and in application of the theory of
1061:
598:
311:
191:
187:
41:
1049:
920:
771:
580:
430:
120:
73:
496:
456:
381:
357:
339:
1256:
1319:
937:
913:
776:
344:
183:
1083:
804:
641:
491:
370:
276:
271:
729:(also implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing or duty to negotiate in good faith)
8:
1103:
1099:
1078:
560:
451:
296:
923:, and Canadian jurisprudence in both Québec and the common law provinces pertaining to
846:
809:
651:
623:
589:
482:
467:
461:
435:
703:
692:
413:
362:
353:
334:
291:
1008:
a mere expression of opinion was held insufficient to be satisfied as a promise. In
1045:
990:
726:
613:
608:
570:
565:
408:
391:
618:
348:
325:
1231:
Letter of Credit, its
Relation with Stipulation for the Benefit of a Third Party
1116:
864:
755:
686:
671:
419:
266:
1313:
973:
655:
403:
376:
306:
398:
1057:
859:
854:
841:
632:
286:
697:
603:
508:
425:
1095:
1053:
899:
882:
301:
850:
525:
251:
1230:
62:
1172:
Crown
Melbourne Limited v Cosmopolitan Hotel (Vic) Pty Ltd HCA 26.
969:
680:
575:
243:
646:
836:
1181:
JJ Savage & Sons Pty Ltd v
Blakney (1970) 119 CLR 435.
1011:
Crown
Melbourne Limited v Cosmopolitan Hotel (Vic) Pty Ltd
984:
826:
916:
both in Québec and in the country's common law provinces
1190:
Evans & Sons Ltd v Andrea
Merzario Ltd 1 WLR 1078.
1219:
Jacobs v
Batavia & General Plantations Trust Ltd
919:
7 Specific to civil law jurisdictions, the
American
87:. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
1098:recognises collateral contract as an exception to
733:Contract A and Contract B in Canadian contract law
1067:
1311:
888:2 Specific to civil and mixed law jurisdictions
1288:Heilbut, Symons & Co v Buckleton UKHL 2.
1077:Collateral contracts are an exception to the
1044:A theory sustains that is feasible to typify
945:
172:The examples and perspective in this article
1301:Barry v Davies t/as Heathcote Ball & Co
925:contractual and pre-contractual negotiation
50:Learn how and when to remove these messages
952:
938:
228:Learn how and when to remove this message
210:Learn how and when to remove this message
147:Learn how and when to remove this message
1257:"Australian Contract Law | Julie Clarke"
1161:J J Savage & Sons Pty Ltd v Blakney
1147:Contracts Collateral & Inconsistent
996:
985:Elements of a valid collateral contract
1312:
1243:Shanklin Pier Ltd v Detel Products Ltd
1090:
1072:
1050:contract for a third-party beneficiary
1017:
721:Duty of honest contractual performance
1296:
1294:
909:of International Commercial Contracts
1198:
1196:
1156:
1154:
1005:JJ Savage and Sons Pty Ltd v Blakney
158:
85:adding citations to reliable sources
56:
15:
1039:
898:and other civil codes based on the
13:
1291:
14:
1331:
1193:
1151:
31:This article has multiple issues.
1109:
723:(or doctrine of abuse of rights)
538:Enforcement of foreign judgments
502:Hague Choice of Court Convention
250:
163:
61:
20:
1282:
1273:
1249:
72:needs additional citations for
39:or discuss these issues on the
1235:
1224:
1208:
1184:
1175:
1166:
1139:
1068:Exception to other legal rules
1064:. it is shortly called as LOC
1030:
531:Singapore Mediation Convention
1:
1279:Donoghue v Stevenson AC 562.
1261:www.australiancontractlaw.com
1132:
905:5 Explicitly rejected by the
672:Quasi-contractual obligations
1217:(1919) 27 CLR 133; see also
1079:privity of contract doctrine
7:
186:, discuss the issue on the
10:
1336:
543:Hague Judgments Convention
1303:1 All ER 944; 1 WLR 1962
968:is usually a single term
894:4 Specific to the German
1215:Hoyt's Pty Ltd v Spencer
1203:Hoyt's Pty Ltd v Spencer
1126:Hoyt's Pty Ltd v Spencer
1062:implied-in-fact contract
599:Anticipatory repudiation
349:unequal bargaining power
1114:In the English case of
921:Uniform Commercial Code
896:BĂĽrgerliches Gesetzbuch
581:Third-party beneficiary
553:Rights of third parties
431:Accord and satisfaction
652:Liquidated, stipulated
497:Forum selection clause
382:Frustration of purpose
914:Canadian contract law
282:Abstraction principle
96:"Collateral contract"
1084:Donoghue v Stevenson
997:Promissory in nature
743:Related areas of law
642:Specific performance
492:Choice of law clause
457:Contract of adhesion
371:Culpa in contrahendo
277:Meeting of the minds
272:Offer and acceptance
192:create a new article
184:improve this article
174:may not represent a
81:improve this article
1163:(1970) 119 CLR 435.
1104:parol evidence rule
1100:parol evidence rule
1091:Parol evidence rule
1073:Privity of contract
1018:Intention to induce
966:collateral contract
907:UNIDROIT Principles
681:Promissory estoppel
561:Privity of contract
514:New York Convention
474:UNIDROIT Principles
317:Collateral contract
312:Implication-in-fact
297:Invitation to treat
1205:(1919) 27 CLR 133.
727:Duty of good faith
624:Fundamental breach
590:Breach of contract
519:UNCITRAL Model Law
483:Dispute resolution
468:Contra proferentem
462:Integration clause
436:Exculpatory clause
962:
961:
805:England and Wales
713:Duties of parties
704:Negotiorum gestio
693:Unjust enrichment
414:Statute of frauds
363:Unconscionability
335:Misrepresentation
292:Mirror image rule
238:
237:
230:
220:
219:
212:
194:, as appropriate.
157:
156:
149:
131:
54:
1327:
1304:
1298:
1289:
1286:
1280:
1277:
1271:
1270:
1268:
1267:
1253:
1247:
1246:(1951) 2 KB 854.
1239:
1233:
1228:
1222:
1212:
1206:
1200:
1191:
1188:
1182:
1179:
1173:
1170:
1164:
1158:
1149:
1145:Aherns Lawyers,
1143:
1048:as a collateral
1046:letter of credit
1040:Letter of credit
954:
947:
940:
782:China (mainland)
751:Conflict of laws
614:Efficient breach
609:Exclusion clause
409:Illusory promise
392:Impracticability
254:
240:
239:
233:
226:
215:
208:
204:
201:
195:
167:
166:
159:
152:
145:
141:
138:
132:
130:
89:
65:
57:
46:
24:
23:
16:
1335:
1334:
1330:
1329:
1328:
1326:
1325:
1324:
1310:
1309:
1308:
1307:
1299:
1292:
1287:
1283:
1278:
1274:
1265:
1263:
1255:
1254:
1250:
1240:
1236:
1229:
1225:
1213:
1209:
1201:
1194:
1189:
1185:
1180:
1176:
1171:
1167:
1159:
1152:
1144:
1140:
1135:
1112:
1093:
1075:
1070:
1042:
1033:
1025:Lord Denning MR
1020:
999:
987:
958:
929:
801:United Kingdom
764:By jurisdiction
234:
223:
222:
221:
216:
205:
199:
196:
181:
168:
164:
153:
142:
136:
133:
90:
88:
78:
66:
25:
21:
12:
11:
5:
1333:
1323:
1322:
1306:
1305:
1290:
1281:
1272:
1248:
1234:
1223:
1207:
1192:
1183:
1174:
1165:
1150:
1137:
1136:
1134:
1131:
1117:Barry v Davies
1111:
1108:
1092:
1089:
1074:
1071:
1069:
1066:
1041:
1038:
1032:
1029:
1019:
1016:
998:
995:
986:
983:
960:
959:
957:
956:
949:
942:
934:
931:
930:
928:
927:
917:
912:6 Specific to
910:
903:
892:
889:
886:
881:1 Specific to
878:
875:
874:
870:
869:
868:
867:
862:
857:
844:
839:
831:
830:
822:
821:
820:
819:
814:
813:
812:
807:
799:
794:
789:
784:
779:
774:
766:
765:
761:
760:
759:
758:
756:Commercial law
753:
745:
744:
740:
739:
738:
737:
736:
735:
724:
715:
714:
710:
709:
708:
707:
700:
695:
690:
687:Quantum meruit
683:
675:
674:
668:
667:
666:
665:
660:
659:
658:
644:
636:
635:
629:
628:
627:
626:
621:
616:
611:
606:
601:
593:
592:
586:
585:
584:
583:
578:
573:
568:
563:
555:
554:
550:
549:
548:
547:
546:
545:
535:
534:
533:
523:
522:
521:
516:
506:
505:
504:
494:
486:
485:
479:
478:
477:
476:
471:
464:
459:
454:
452:Parol evidence
446:
445:
444:Interpretation
441:
440:
439:
438:
433:
428:
423:
420:Non est factum
416:
411:
406:
401:
396:
395:
394:
389:
384:
374:
367:
366:
365:
351:
342:
337:
329:
328:
322:
321:
320:
319:
314:
309:
304:
299:
294:
289:
284:
279:
274:
269:
261:
260:
256:
255:
247:
246:
236:
235:
218:
217:
178:of the subject
176:worldwide view
171:
169:
162:
155:
154:
69:
67:
60:
55:
29:
28:
26:
19:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1332:
1321:
1318:
1317:
1315:
1302:
1297:
1295:
1285:
1276:
1262:
1258:
1252:
1245:
1244:
1238:
1232:
1227:
1220:
1216:
1211:
1204:
1199:
1197:
1187:
1178:
1169:
1162:
1157:
1155:
1148:
1142:
1138:
1130:
1128:
1127:
1121:
1119:
1118:
1110:Notable cases
1107:
1105:
1101:
1097:
1088:
1086:
1085:
1080:
1065:
1063:
1059:
1055:
1051:
1047:
1037:
1028:
1026:
1015:
1013:
1012:
1007:
1006:
994:
992:
982:
978:
975:
974:consideration
971:
967:
955:
950:
948:
943:
941:
936:
935:
933:
932:
926:
922:
918:
915:
911:
908:
904:
901:
897:
893:
890:
887:
885:jurisdictions
884:
880:
879:
877:
876:
872:
871:
866:
863:
861:
858:
856:
852:
848:
845:
843:
840:
838:
835:
834:
833:
832:
828:
824:
823:
818:
817:United States
815:
811:
808:
806:
803:
802:
800:
798:
795:
793:
790:
788:
785:
783:
780:
778:
775:
773:
770:
769:
768:
767:
763:
762:
757:
754:
752:
749:
748:
747:
746:
742:
741:
734:
731:
730:
728:
725:
722:
719:
718:
717:
716:
712:
711:
706:
705:
701:
699:
696:
694:
691:
689:
688:
684:
682:
679:
678:
677:
676:
673:
670:
669:
664:
661:
657:
656:penal damages
653:
650:
649:
648:
647:Money damages
645:
643:
640:
639:
638:
637:
634:
631:
630:
625:
622:
620:
617:
615:
612:
610:
607:
605:
602:
600:
597:
596:
595:
594:
591:
588:
587:
582:
579:
577:
574:
572:
569:
567:
564:
562:
559:
558:
557:
556:
552:
551:
544:
541:
540:
539:
536:
532:
529:
528:
527:
524:
520:
517:
515:
512:
511:
510:
507:
503:
500:
499:
498:
495:
493:
490:
489:
488:
487:
484:
481:
480:
475:
472:
470:
469:
465:
463:
460:
458:
455:
453:
450:
449:
448:
447:
443:
442:
437:
434:
432:
429:
427:
426:Unclean hands
424:
422:
421:
417:
415:
412:
410:
407:
405:
402:
400:
397:
393:
390:
388:
387:Impossibility
385:
383:
380:
379:
378:
377:Force majeure
375:
373:
372:
368:
364:
361:
360:
359:
358:public policy
355:
352:
350:
346:
343:
341:
338:
336:
333:
332:
331:
330:
327:
324:
323:
318:
315:
313:
310:
308:
307:Consideration
305:
303:
300:
298:
295:
293:
290:
288:
285:
283:
280:
278:
275:
273:
270:
268:
265:
264:
263:
262:
258:
257:
253:
249:
248:
245:
242:
241:
232:
229:
214:
211:
203:
200:December 2010
193:
189:
185:
179:
177:
170:
161:
160:
151:
148:
140:
129:
126:
122:
119:
115:
112:
108:
105:
101:
98: –
97:
93:
92:Find sources:
86:
82:
76:
75:
70:This article
68:
64:
59:
58:
53:
51:
44:
43:
38:
37:
32:
27:
18:
17:
1320:Contract law
1300:
1284:
1275:
1264:. Retrieved
1260:
1251:
1241:
1237:
1226:
1218:
1214:
1210:
1202:
1186:
1177:
1168:
1160:
1141:
1124:
1122:
1115:
1113:
1094:
1082:
1076:
1058:legal tender
1043:
1034:
1021:
1009:
1003:
1000:
988:
979:
965:
963:
860:Criminal law
842:Property law
797:Saudi Arabia
702:
685:
466:
418:
369:
316:
287:Posting rule
244:Contract law
224:
206:
197:
173:
143:
134:
124:
117:
110:
103:
91:
79:Please help
74:verification
71:
47:
40:
34:
33:Please help
30:
1031:Consistency
698:Restitution
509:Arbitration
137:August 2014
1266:2016-07-31
1221:1 Ch. 287.
1133:References
1096:Common law
1054:Jean Domat
972:, made in
900:pandectist
883:common law
663:Rescission
571:Delegation
566:Assignment
354:Illegality
302:Firm offer
107:newspapers
36:improve it
902:tradition
772:Australia
619:Deviation
526:Mediation
259:Formation
188:talk page
42:talk page
1314:Category
970:contract
865:Evidence
837:Tort law
810:Scotland
633:Remedies
576:Novation
399:Hardship
326:Defences
267:Capacity
182:You may
855:estates
787:Ireland
404:Set-off
345:Threats
340:Mistake
121:scholar
853:, and
851:trusts
825:Other
777:Canada
123:
116:
109:
102:
94:
873:Notes
847:Wills
829:areas
792:India
654:, or
604:Cover
190:, or
128:JSTOR
114:books
991:term
356:and
347:and
100:news
1123:In
827:law
83:by
1316::
1293:^
1259:.
1195:^
1153:^
1087:.
964:A
849:,
45:.
1269:.
953:e
946:t
939:v
231:)
225:(
213:)
207:(
202:)
198:(
180:.
150:)
144:(
139:)
135:(
125:·
118:·
111:·
104:·
77:.
52:)
48:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
