Exemption Clauses Flashcards Preview

Contract Law > Exemption Clauses > Flashcards

Flashcards in Exemption Clauses Deck (9)
Loading flashcards...
0

Investors Compensation Scheme v West Bromwich Building Society

Lord Hoffman's restatement of interpretation affects this area but may have overstated the case somewhat - as Lord Wilberforce said, 'one should not readily discard reasoned authority'

1

Wallis, Son & Wells v Pratt & Haynes

Narrow reading of exemption clauses - the inadequacy of the seed sold here was a condition and the exemption clause only covered warranties

2

Ailsa Craig Fishing Co v Malvern Fishing Co and Securicor

Although a narrow interpretation is applied to both exemption and limitation clauses, this is applied more rigourously to the former

3

Andrew Bros (Bournemouth) v Singer & Co

The exemption clause only excluded implied terms, not express ones, the contract was for the sale of new cars and the car sold was not new

4

Karsales (Harrow) v Wallis

The exemption clause could not apply, the agreement related to a car and the car that had been provided was so badly damaged that it could no longer be considered a car as it was incapable of self-propulsion - the issue with this is where is the line drawn? When is a car a car?

5

Harbutt's Plasticine v Wayne Tank and Pump Co

Denning tried to assert that a contract ceased to exist once it had been terminated, this cannot because the contract is where the injured party derives its right to a remedy from and the same applies to exemption clauses - overruled by HL in Photo Productions

6

Photo Production v Securicor Transport

Overruled Denning in Harbutt's - here the clause was effective in shielding Securicor from liability - they had only charged a modest sum and were unaware of the premises potential safety issues, etc

7

Canada Steamship v The King

The exclusion of liability for negligence - the clause did exclude liability for negligence, but it was so wide that it incorporated other liabilities, which were controlled by statute - the Crown was therefore not shielded - liability can be expressly and impliedly excluded

8

Hollier v Rambler Motors

Not validly incorporated to exclude negligence, but, even if it had it was insufficient - 'the language should be so plain that it clearly bears that meaning' Salmon LJ