Privity doctrine affirmed by House of Lords.
Claimants owned drum of chemicals.
Made contract of carriage with carriers.
Carriers contracted with stevedores to unload.
Damaged – claimants sued stevedores for negligence.
Stevedores wanted to rely on exclusion clause in contract of carriage between
claimants and carriers.
House of Lords held they could not.
Clear from Tweddle and Dunlop that stranger to contract cannot
‘take advantage of provisions in the contract, even where it is clear from the
contract that some provision in it was intended to benefit him’.
Lord Denning dissented and cast doubt on validity of privity doctrine.
[Had also done so earlier in Smith