Anmerkungen:
In: 43 Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law 93 (2014)
Nach Informationen von SSRN wurde die ursprüngliche Fassung des Dokuments August 15, 2014 erstellt
Beschreibung:
Third world citizens — parties who often have the most to lose in natural resource contracts between their governments and foreign investors — often have no voice in negotiations of the contracts and consequently have no remedy under contract law when harms occur or when the contracts are not properly enforced. The privity of contracts doctrine, which permits contract suits only by parties to the contract, bars these citizens from suing because they were not in privity with any of the contracting parties, despite that these contracts are generally made for the benefit of these citizens. However, some countries have adopted — and this Essay argues other countries ought to adopt — a rule that adequately protects the interests of these third parties: the Third Party Beneficiary Principle.The Third Party Beneficiary Principle permits third parties — who lack privity — to sue where the contract was formed for the benefit of such third parties. In the context of natural resource contracts, citizens are the intended third party beneficiaries, and as such should have some legal mechanism by which they can sue under the contract.The Third Party Beneficiary Principle is the best possible solution to current problems. It can supplement the unenforceable methods of reproach currently available to citizens in natural resource contract situations that adversely affects them. Though the Third Party Beneficiary Principle is not perfect in its application, it is the best possible method currently available for permitting citizens to seek legal remedies