Who is entitled to revoke or modify the reservation concerning the obligation to provide a benefit to a third party

Abstract

In this paper, I seek historical arguments concerning the contemporary controversial issue of who holds the right to revoke or modify a stipulation regarding the obligation to provide for a third party. I address this problem across each historical period of legal development, starting from Roman law and extending to the regulation contained in the Code of Obligations, highlighting the diversity of views. Historical experience teaches that revoking or modifying a stipulation should generally be permissible, and the question of who holds this right should be regulated within the contract itself. In the absence of such regulation, it should be assumed that the creditor is entitled to the right, without the need for debtor’s consent.