body: Paul Davies. [*JC Smith's The Law of Contract* (2018 2 ed)](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Smiths-Law-Contract-Paul-Davies/dp/0198807813/ref=dp_ob_title_bk). p. 135.
  
  
  
  > 
  > [![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/EjOOO.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/EjOOO.jpg)
  > 
  > 
  > 
  
  
  1. How's the red underline true? How's "third parties" ambiguous? The textbook refers to the [Introduction](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1999/31/introduction) that doesn't define "third parties", but [Section 1](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1999/31/section/1) does:
  
  
  
  > 
  > (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, a person who is not a party to a contract (a “third party”) may in his own right enforce a term of the contract if—
  > 
  > 
  > 
  
  
  2. I don't understand why "C, when he is a promisee, would be well advised
  to make his claim in the alternative." Wouldn't judges follow the Law Commission's standpoint as I underlined in purple? Davies doesn't expatiate why courts wouldn't?
  
  
  
title: Why ought a third-party promisee to a contract make his claim in the alternative?