Tweddle v Atkinson  EWHC J57 (QB), (1861) 1 B&S 393 is an English contract law case concerning the principle of privity of contract and consideration.Its panel of appeal judges reinforced that the doctrine of privity meant that only those who are party to an agreement (outside of one of the well-established exceptional relationships such as agency, bailment or trusteeship) may sue … As such, the father of the groom and father of the bride entered into an agreement that they would both pay sums of money to the couple. John Tweddle (the Plaintiff's father) agreed with William Guy (the Plaintiff's father in law) for the latter to pay money to the Plaintiff upon marriage. Contract law – Privity of contract. Tweddle v Atkinson (1861) 1 B&S 393.
Tweddle v Atkinson. Could the contract be enforced by a third party; Facts. The father of the bride entered an agreement with the father of the groom that they would each pay the couple a sum of money.
The father of the son also died so was unable to sue on the agreement. Tweddle v Atkinson  Facts. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICEQUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION . The father of the bride died without having paid. Tweddle v Atkinson  EWHC QB J57 Queen's Bench Division A couple were getting married. The son and daughter of the parties involved in this dispute were getting married.
A brides’s father agreed with the groom’s father that he would pay £200 the the groom; After not paying the groom, could the groom enforce the promise with the late bride’s father’s estate; Issue. Guy died before making payment and the Plaintiff (William Tweddle) sued the estate (Atkinson was the executor) for the promised sum.