promisor

Moreover, why did the promisor make the promise if it was to have no legal effect?

Section 3 covers the defences available to the promisor if the third party brings an action against him.

This liability can never exceed the amount that the promisor owes under the contract.

Consequently, the debtor is still liable for the whole amount, as he cannot force the promisor to accept less.

Something that is already done is done, and it does not change the legal position of the promisor.

Would the promise of a complete stranger to pay a mother to maintain her illegitimate child be binding on the promisor?

While, therefore, the performance may not be a detriment to the promisee, it is certainly a benefit to the promisor.

The promisee can also sue the promisor for failing to pay the third party beneficiary.

An illusory promise, or one which the promisor actually has no obligation to keep, does not count as consideration.

If loss is incurred, then the promisor is condemned in a sum of money.

At the same time the courts may add conditions to that decision, such as requiring the promisor or promisee to pay the third party compensation.

In unilateral contracts, the promisor seeks acceptance by performance from the promisee.

A donee beneficiary can sue the promisor directly to enforce the promise.

Strictly speaking, this is an illusory promise, since the promisor has no actual legal burden to pay if he chooses not to.

Put differently, the mere possibility that the promisor would do business is a valuable product of the bargain even if he does not do anything.

Agent: "Where personal skill is not required, the promisor may appoint his agent to perform it.

Accordingly, courts will often read implied-in-fact or implied-in-law terms into the contract, placing duties on the promisor.

First, while promising always purports to impose obligations on the promisor, consenting does not always do so.

If the promisor gets what he asks for in return for his promise, he has received sufficient consideration and is bound.

However, courts will generally imply in law that the promisor must act in good faith and reject the deal only if he is genuinely dissatisfied.

The promisor has maximum protection and the promisee has maximum risk in this scenario.

Any effort by the promisor or the promisee to rescind or modify the contract at that point are void.

Third persons: "When a promisee accepts performance from a third person, he cannot afterwards enforce it against promisor".

The proof of possible detriment or prejudice, which will appear if the promisor is allowed to revert to his original promise, is required.

Third, the doctrine of agency requires that the principal not named in the contract can only be sued if the promisor was contracted as an agent.