enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Phillips Products Ltd v Hyland and Hamstead Plant Hire Co Ltd

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillips_Products_Ltd_v...

    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.

  3. Unfair terms in English contract law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfair_terms_in_English...

    Unfair terms in English contract law are regulated under three major pieces of legislation, compliance with which is enforced by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 is the first main Act, which covers some contracts that have exclusion and limitation clauses. For example, it will not extend to cover ...

  4. Stewart Gill Ltd v Horatio Myer & Co Ltd - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stewart_Gill_Ltd_v_Horatio...

    Gill argued that clause 12.4 of the conditions of sale applied, which said 'The customer shall not be entitled to withhold payment of any amount due to the company under the contract by reason of any payment credit set off counterclaim allegation of incorrect or defective goods or for any other reason whatsoever which the customer may allege ...

  5. R&B Customs Brokers Co Ltd v United Dominions Trust Ltd

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R&B_Customs_Brokers_Co_Ltd...

    An exemption clause in the contract for the car provided that the implied conditions about fitness for purpose were excluded. R&B argued that this was contrary to UCTA 1977 section 6, and United Dominions contended that R&B could not avail themselves of the Act because as a business they could not count as a consumer.

  6. First Tower Trustees Ltd v CDS (Superstores International) Ltd

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Tower_Trustees_Ltd_v...

    The Judge found the lease was entered based on the landlord's misrepresentation, and clause 5.8 attempted to exclude liability for misrepresentation, but was unreasonable under the Misrepresentation Act 1967 section 3 and the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 section 11. Their liability was not limited to the extent of the trust's assets.

  7. Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking Ltd - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thornton_v_Shoe_Lane...

    Although the case is important for these two propositions, today any exclusion of negligence liability for personal injury by businesses is prohibited by the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 s 2(1) and the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 Sch 2, para(a).

  8. St Albans City and DC v International Computers Ltd - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Albans_City_and_DC_v...

    The software was meant to create a register of tax payers. Because of errors in the software, the loss to the council was £1,313,846. The council claimed breach of contract, and that the liability limitation was unreasonable under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977. International Computers Ltd claimed that the liability limitation should remain.

  9. Arnold v Britton - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_v_Britton

    Sections 2 to 4 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 do not in any event apply to contracts relating to the creation or transfer of interests in land (Schedule 1, paragraph 1(b)). No such limitation appears in the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (SI 1999/2083), which give effect in this country to EC Directive 93/13/EEC of ...