Which principle allows a party to enforce a contract even if they were not a party to it?

The principle that allows a party to enforce a contract even if they were not a party to it is known as the doctrine of privity of contract. Traditionally, this doctrine holds that only the parties to a contract can enforce its terms or benefit from it, creating a mutual obligation between the contracting parties.

However, the question is likely referencing exceptions to this doctrine or instances where third parties can gain rights under a contract. For example, certain jurisdictions may allow third parties to enforce a contract if it was expressly intended for their benefit, deviating from the strict traditional view of privity.

In contrast, the doctrines of agency, consideration, and specific performance do not directly allow for the enforcement of contracts by non-parties. The doctrine of agency involves a relationship where one party (the agent) acts on behalf of another (the principal), while consideration pertains to the value exchanged in a contract, and specific performance is a remedy that compels a party to fulfill their contractual obligations. Each of these concepts serves different functions within contract law and does not provide the same mechanism for third-party enforcement as the doctrine of privity.