O'Sullivan & Hilliard's The Law of Contract (2018 8 ed). p 131.
6.27 A particular form of collateral contract has been developed in the context of carriage of goods to allow C to take the benefit of an exclusion clause in the A–B contract. While Scruttons confirmed that the first limb of the privity rule covers exclusion clauses, Lord
Reid suggested that had the following conditions been satisfied, C might have been able to establish a contract between A and C (recall that in Scruttons, C, the stevedore, was attempting to rely upon a clause limiting liability in the contract between A, the consignee and B, the carrier):
I can see a possibility of success of the agency argument if
(first) the bill of lading makes it clear that the stevedore is intended to be protected by the provisions in it which limit liability,
(second) the bill of lading makes it clear that the carrier, in addition to contracting for these provisions on his own behalf, is also contracting as agent for the stevedore that these provisions should apply to the stevedore,
(third) the carrier has authority from the stevedore to do that, or perhaps later ratification by the stevedore would suffice, and
(four) that any difficulties about consideration moving from the stevedore were overcome.
1. Why's there no article between as and agent?
2. Is the use of that correct? To what main clause does it apply?