Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 regulates clauses that exclude or limit terms implied by the common law or statute. Its general pattern is that if clauses restrict liability, particularly negligence , of one party, the clause must pass the "reasonableness test" in section 11 and Schedule 2.
Condition 8 of their contract stated the driver would be deemed to be the employee of Phillips Products. The driver crashed into Phillips’ factory wall. Phillips argued that Hamstead Plant Hire should pay for the damage caused by Mr Hyland, because condition 8 was caught by UCTA 1977 section 2(2) and was unreasonable. Hamstead Plant Hire ...
The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (c. 50) is an act of Parliament of the United Kingdom which regulates contracts by restricting the operation and legality of some contract terms. It extends to nearly all forms of contract and one of its most important functions is limiting the applicability of disclaimers of liability. The terms extend to ...
Dillon LJ held that the exclusion clause would have passed the reasonableness test under UCTA 1977 section 6(3), section 11 and Schedule 2. In fact the company was dealing as a consumer, and therefore section 6(2) applied to make the SGA 1979 mandatory; exclusion was not a possibility.
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us
Finney Lock Seeds Ltd agreed to supply George Mitchell (Chesterhall) Ltd with 30 lb of Dutch winter cabbage seed for £201.60. An invoice sent with the delivery was considered part of the contract and limited liability to replacing 'any seeds or plants sold' if defective (clause 1) and excluding all liability for loss or damage or consequential loss or damage from use of the seed (clause 2 ...
The University of Texas is bringing back standardized testing as part of its admissions requirements starting for the 2025 fall semester, citing data that shows knowing students' SAT or ACT test ...
Before the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, the courts had not developed a jurisdiction to strike down unfair terms. When faced with harsh exclusion clauses they would often "interpret their way out" of the plain meaning of the clause through a process of strict construction against the party relying on a clause (in Latin, contra proferentem ).