The Principles, while stating a general proposition that offers are revocable, allow them to be made irrevocable by an ind ication to that effect(Art 2: 202 ) The Scots law concept of promise allows a party to make offers irrevocable or"firm' by an appropriate statement in th offer. 1 In French law offers are revocable but nonetheless an offeree may have a claim in damages if the offeror abuses his right, while in germany offers are irrevocable unless otherwise stated. Offers are al ways revocable in English law, however, unless the offeree provides consideration. The problems which this limitation creates are overcome to some extent by the distinctive rule of English law, under which a postal acceptance concludes a contract at the time and place of posting rather than when and where it is communicated to the offeror. 16 This rule has also been received into scots law although the scottish law Commission has recommended its abolition in a report published in 1993. 17 Given that the Principles start on the basis that offers are revocable, it has to do something to protect offerees where the parties are not dealing face to face, the solution is to provide that offers can no longer be revoked once the offeree has dispatched an acceptance(Art 2: 202(1), but the contract is not concluded until the acceptance reaches the offeror(Art 2: 205(1) 3. Contracts for the benefit of third parties The Principles follow the Continental and Scots legal systems in recognising that contracting parties may create enforceable rights for third parties by appropriate terms in their contract (Art 6: 110).18 English law by contrast starts from the doctrine of privity, under which only benefit racting parties can acquire rights under a contract, even if they intend to confer a Commission was the need for English law to be brought into harmony with the approach a o pon a third party. The Law Commission of England and Wales produced a report this subject in 1996, recommending the abandonment of privity and the introduction of a stem of third party rights. 19 Signif icantly, one of the reasons for this change given by elsewhere in Europe 4. Performance as the primary right of a creditor The Principles provide a range of remedies for breach of contract, or non-performance, as the Lando Commission has preferred to term the matter. First among them is the aggrieved partys entitlement, or right, to specific performance of the other party's obligation(Art 9: 102(1). Here again the model being followed is that of the Continental systems, 20 and under Scots law too the cred itor's primary remedy is an order for specific implement. 21 In I5WWMcBryde, The Law ofContract in Scotland(Edinburgh, 1987)pp 65, 68-70; The Laws ofscotland Stair Memorial Encyclopaedia(Edinburgh, 1987-1996, henceforth SME), vol 15, para 617 16For all the foregoing see Zweigert and Kotz, pp. 356-64 17Report on Formation of Contract: Scottish Law and the United Nations Convention on Contracts forthe nternational Sale of Goods( Scot Law Com No 144, 1993) 18For third party rights in Scotland see SME, vol 15, paras 824-52; for the Continent Zweigert and Kotz, pp 456-69 Report on Privity of Contract: Contracts for the Benefit of Third Parties ( Law Com No 242, 1996) oZweigert and Kotz, pp. 472-79 G H Tre itel, Remedies for Breach of Contract: a comparative account(Oxford, 1988),pp 43-63(note also pp. 71-74 on mixed systems 2IMcBryde, pp. 509-14 See also A D Smith, "Some comparative aspects of specific implement in Scots lawThe Principles, while stating a general proposition that offers are revocable, allow them to be made irrevocable by an indication to that effect (Art 2:202). The Scots law concept of promise allows a party to make offers irrevocable or ‘firm’ by an appropriate statement in the offer.15 In French law offers are revocable but nonetheless an offeree may have a claim in damages if the offeror abuses his right, while in Germany offers are irrevocable unless otherwise stated. Offers are always revocable in English law, however, unless the offeree provides consideration. The problems which this limitation creates are overcome to some extent by the distinctive rule of English law, under which a postal acceptance concludes a contract at the time and place of posting rather than when and where it is communicated to the offeror.16 This rule has also been received into Scots law, although the Scottish Law Commission has recommended its abolition in a report published in 1993.17 Given that the Principles start on the basis that offers are revocable, it has to do something to protect offerees where the parties are not dealing face to face; the solution is to provide that offers can no longer be revoked once the offeree has dispatched an acceptance (Art 2:202(1)), but the contract is not concluded until the acceptance reaches the offeror (Art 2:205(1)). 3. Contracts for the benefit of third parties The Principles follow the Continental and Scots legal systems in recognising that contracting parties may create enforceable rights for third parties by appropriate terms in their contract (Art 6:110).18 English law by contrast starts from the doctrine of privity, under which only the contracting parties can acquire rights under a contract, even if they intend to confer a benefit upon a third party. The Law Commission of England and Wales produced a report on this subject in 1996, recommending the abandonment of privity and the introduction of a system of third party rights.19 Significantly, one of the reasons for this change given by the Commission was the need for English law to be brought into harmony with the approach elsewhere in Europe. 4. Performance as the primary right of a creditor The Principles provide a range of remedies for breach of contract, or non-performance, as the Lando Commission has preferred to term the matter. First among them is the aggrieved party’s entitlement, or right, to specific performance of the other party’s obligation (Art 9:102(1)). Here again the model being followed is that of the Continental systems,20 and under Scots law too the creditor’s primary remedy is an order for specific implement.21 In 15W W McBryde, The Law of Contract in Scotland (Edinburgh, 1987) pp. 65, 68-70; The Laws of Scotland: Stair Memorial Encyclopaedia (Edinburgh, 1987-1996, henceforth SME), vol 15, para 617. 16For all the foregoing see Zweigert and Kötz, pp. 356-64. 17Report on Formation of Contract: Scottish Law and the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (Scot Law Com No 144, 1993). 18For third party rights in Scotland see SME, vol 15, paras 824-52; for the Continent Zweigert and Kötz, pp. 456-69. 19Report on Privity of Contract: Contracts for the Benefit of Third Parties (Law Com No 242, 1996). 20Zweigert and Kötz, pp. 472-79; G H Treitel, Remedies for Breach of Contract: a comparative account (Oxford, 1988), pp. 43-63 (note also pp. 71-74 on mixed systems). 21McBryde, pp. 509-14. See also A D Smith, ‘Some comparative aspects of specific implement in Scots law’