Fitz-Gibbon v Wily

Fitz-Gibbon v Wily concerned a dispute between the plaintiff, Fitz-Gibbon, and the defendant, Wily, regarding the enforceability of a deed. The matter came before the High Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the deed, which contained a covenant by the defendant to pay a sum of money to the plaintiff, was valid and enforceable at the suit of the plaintiff, despite the plaintiff not being a party to the deed. This raised questions concerning the doctrine of privity of contract and its application to deeds.

The High Court considered the established principle that a contract or deed cannot confer rights or impose obligations on a person who is not a party to it. Applying this principle, their Honours found that the plaintiff, not being a party to the deed, could not enforce the covenant contained within it. The Court affirmed that the doctrine of privity of contract, in its traditional form, remained a significant barrier to third-party enforcement of contractual rights in Australian law.

The High Court dismissed the plaintiff's appeal.