contestada

A grandfather told his granddaughter that she could have his house because he was moving to a retirement home, and entered into a valid contract to convey it to her. He promised her that he would have another wing added to the house in the back before turning it over to her, and entered into a written contract with a builder to construct the addition for his granddaughter. Before the grandfather had entered into the contract with the builder, the granddaughter had paid $5,000 for a 60-day option to purchase another house because she was not sure she would like the addition. However, when her grandfather showed her the plans for his house prepared by the builder, she liked it very much and decided to let her option to purchase the other house lapse. Shortly thereafter, the local zoning authority increased the minimum lot line setbacks, making it impracticable to put the addition on the back of the house. The builder offered to put an addition above the existing floor rather than in the back, and the grandfather agreed. After the granddaughter's option had lapsed, she discovered that the addition was now going up rather than in the back. She angrily demanded that the builder either build the addition according to the original specifications that she approved or pay her damages. The builder refused and the granddaughter filed suit.
Who is more likely to prevail?

Respuesta :

In the given situation "The builder will prevail because he may raise all defenses that he had against the grandfather and against the third-party beneficiary granddaughter".

Who is third-party beneficiary?

An individual who is not a party to a contract but is yet eligible to gain from its fulfillment is referred to as a third-party beneficiary. The promiseor and promisee are the parties to the contract, and they are the ones with privity.

For the given case-

  • In this instance, the granddaughter is a third-party beneficiary of the builder-grandfather agreement.
  • Third party beneficiaries have rights under the agreement from which they are benefiting as soon as the third party beneficiary takes action to vest those rights in the agreement, such as showing consent to the promise, filing a lawsuit to enforce the agreement, or materially altering her position by lawfully relying on the agreement's promise.
  • When the granddaughter in the case at hand let her option contract for the second house she was considering buying lapse, she fundamentally changed her position and justifiedly relied on the contract.
  • Generally, after a third party beneficiary's rights under the contract have accrued, the third party cannot object to any changes being made to the contract.
  • The third party beneficiary will, however, be subject to any defenses that were available to the original contractual parties at the time the rights vest with the third party.
  • Here, the builder stated that the new zoning regulations would make the addition to the back of the house impractical.

In this way, the builder might argue the same impracticability defense against the grandchild and escape having to pay penalties for breaking the terms of the original contract.

To know more about the third-party beneficiary rights, here

https://brainly.com/question/25038564

#SPJ4

Otras preguntas