Exemption Clauses Flashcards

1
Q

3 ways to incorporate exemption clauses

A

Signature
Notice
Course of Dealings

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

L’Estrange v Graucob

A

Clause will be incorporated by signature if:

  • clause is legible and signed by claimant; and
  • the document is a contractual document
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

If a clause is misrepresented, it will be invalid

A

Curtis v Chemical Cleaning

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

To be incorporated by notice, the document containing the clause must be contractual in nature

A

Chapelton v Barry Urban

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

To be incorporated by notice, there must be either actual notice or constructive notice

A

Parker v South Eastern Railway

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Factors to consider for whether steps to give customer notice were reasonable

A

position of clause
prominence of clause
type of clause

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Onerous clauses must be explicitly drawn to attention

A

Example of a red hand point to clause in red ink in Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Onerous clause printed on foot of deliver note is not reasonable

A

Interfoto Picture v Stiletto

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Reasonable steps to incorporate notice must occur before contract finalised (or at time fo finalisation)

A

Olley v Marlborough Court

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

A course of dealings can provide notice after a contract is finalised, if consistent in both frequency and terms

A

Spurling J v Bradshaw

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Kendall v Lillico

A

Course of dealings 3/4 times per month over 3 years amounted to a course of dealings

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Hollier v Rambler Motors

A

3/4 times in 5 years did NOT amount to course of dealings

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

McCutcheon v MacBrayne

A

If signing of contract is not consistent, neither is course of dealings

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Contra proferentem rule

A

If clause is ambiguous or unclear, the courts will interpret it against the party relying on it
(Houghton v Trafalgar Insurance)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Exemption clause of negligence

Canada Steamship Lines v The King

A

Clause must clearly relate to negligence, and not be so wide as to cover other liabilities

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

If the exemption clause is clearly worded, very serious breaches can be covered

A

Photo Productions v Securicor Transport

17
Q

UCTA 1997

A

Unfair Contract Terms Act 1997

18
Q

To what does UCTA apply to?

A
  • breach of SGA/SGSA
  • negligence and negligent breach of contract
  • breaches of express terms

All for things done in the course of business

19
Q

If exclusion of liability for death or personal injury caused by negligence

A

Voids the clause

s.2(1) UCTA

20
Q

If exclusion of liability for loss or damage to property caused by negligence

A

Subjects clause to reasonableness test

S.2(2) UCTA

21
Q

If exclusion for breach of express term

A

Subjects clause to reasonable test

S.3 UCTA

22
Q

If breach of:

s. 12 SGA
s. 2 SGSA

A

Voids clause

s. 6(1) UCTA
s. 7(3A) UCTA

23
Q

If breach of:

ss. 13-15 SGA
ss. 3-4 SGSA

A

Subjects clause to reasonable test

24
Q

The Reasonable Test

It must be fair and reasonable to include the exemption having regard to circumstances that:

A
  • were known
  • ought reasonably to have been known; or
  • were within the contemplation of the parties when the contract was made
25
s.11 UCTA 1997
Reasonableness Test
26
Statutory guidelines for reasonableness
Sch 2 UCTA 1997 | s.11(4) UCTA (for limitation clauses)
27
Smith v Eric Bush
Factors to consider for reasonableness: - equal bargaining power? - reasonably practicable to obtain advice from alternative source? - Difficulty of task
28
St Albans CDC v International Computers Ltd
Factors to consider for limitation clause reasonableness: - experienced commercial bodies are free to make their own bargain - was there awareness of limitation clause at time of contract? - is type of clause common for industry in questions? - Does D have ample resources for the liability?
29
Standard industry terms are generally reasonable
Schenkers v Overland Shoes
30
When deciding if a clause is reasonable, clause must be considered as a whole
Stewart Gill v Horation Myer
31
If term has separate parts, their reasonableness should be considered separately
Watford Electronics v Sanderson
32
A clause that excludes liability for misrepresentation could be read to include exclusion for fraudulent misrepresentation
Thomas Witter v TBP
33
General Rule: An exemption clause cannot protect a third party as the privity of contract rule provides that only a party to a contract can rely on the clause
Adler v Dickson
34
Exception to Third Parties Rule Third party can acquire rights if contract expressly provides he may acquire a benefit; or term purports to confer a benefit on him
Contract (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 (s.1(1))
35
Exception to Third Parties Rule | Negligence
A third party may claim in the tort of negligence if they can establish duty, breach and causation