scholarly journals Third-Party Doctrine Principles and the Fourth Amendment: Challenges and Opportunities for First Responder Emergency Officials

Laws ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 7
Author(s):  
Klaus Schmidt ◽  
Katrin C. Varner ◽  
Agrey D. Chenga
Keyword(s):  
Fourth Amendment ◽  
First Responders ◽  
Third Party ◽  
First Responder ◽  
Secondary Sources ◽  
The Third ◽  
Legal Implications ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
The Third Party ◽  
Practical Experiences

The unresolved issues between the Fourth Amendment and the third-party doctrine provide first responders with challenges in their approach to meet the needs of any emergency they may be called for. A first responder needs to provide help quickly, and often this does not leave much time to think about the legal implications of some of their actions. With the rise of the Internet, the challenges of terrorism, and WikiLeaks, first responders are no longer sheltered from the legal implications that the use of information from online and other secondary sources may have. Specifically, privacy concerns may be raised when first responders use social media either as a tool to gather information about evolving emergencies, or to engage in the process of monitoring those media to detect potential threats to the safety of the country and its citizens. This paper will address some challenges first responders face when considering the third-party doctrine principles and the Fourth Amendment in their rescue efforts. What are some liability and legal concerns in the context of what first responders encounter when responding to potential threats? The paper will also include a discussion of practical experiences with the Fourth Amendment and third-party doctrine principles and explore liability issues related to first responders’ use of information.

Resolving tension from the third-party forgiveness effect

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaclyn M. Moloney ◽  
Chelsea A. Reid ◽  
Jody L. Davis ◽  
Jeni L. Burnette ◽  
Jeffrey D. Green
Keyword(s):  
Third Party ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Third Party

Relaxations of Contractual Privity and the Need for Third Party Rights in Chinese Contract Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chen Lei
Keyword(s):  
Direct Action ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Chinese Law ◽  
The Third ◽  
Right Of Action ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Third Party ◽  
The Right

This chapter examines the position of third party beneficiaries in Chinese law. Article 64 of the Chinese Contract Law states that where a contract for the benefit of a third party is breached, the debtor is liable to the creditor. The author regards this as leaving unanswered the question of whether the thirdparty has a right of direct action against the debtor. One view regards the third party as having the right to sue for the benefit although this right was ultimately excluded from the law. Another view, supported by the Supreme People’s Court, is that Article 64 does not provide a right of action for a third party and merely prescribes performance in ‘incidental’ third party contracts. The third view is that there is a third party right of action in cases of ‘genuine’ third party contracts but courts are unlikely to recognize a third party action where the contract merely purports to confer a benefit on the third party.

Contracts for the Benefit of Third Parties Under the Taiwan Civil Code

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheng-Lin JAN
Keyword(s):  
Civil Code ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The Third ◽  
Legal Relationship ◽  
The Third Party ◽  
Privity Of Contract

This chapter discusses the position of third party beneficiaries in Taiwan law where the principle of privity of contract is well established. Article 269 of the Taiwan Civil Code confers a right on the third party to sue for performance as long as the parties have at least impliedly agreed. This should be distinguished from a ‘spurious contract’ for the benefit of third parties where there is no agreement to permit the third party to claim. Both the aggrieved party and the third party beneficiary can sue on the contract, but only for its own loss. The debtor can only set off on a counterclaim arising from its legal relationship with the third party. Where the third party coerces the debtor into the contract, the contract can be avoided, but where the third party induces the debtor to contract with the creditor by misrepresentation, the debtor can only avoid the contract if the creditor knows or ought to have known of the misrepresentation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document