Contracts - 1.8 - Exemption Clauses Flashcards

1
Q

Exemption clause:

A

A contractual term that purports to limit or exclude a liability that would otherwise attach to one of the contracting parties.

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

The obligations affected by an exemption clause may be…

A
  • Contractual
  • Tortious
  • Both
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Limitation of liability

A

Will usually cap liability in relation to a particular event at a particular sum

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

Exclusion Clause

A

Suggests type of exemption clause that excludes rather than limits liability

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

What are the three points to consider when looking at exemption clauses

A

1) Incorporation - is the exemption clause part of the contract
2) Construction - Does the clause as drafted cover
3) Statutory Controls

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

General elements of an exemption clause

A

Two or more steatments of:
* whether liability is entirely excluded or only limited to a stated amount.
* which types of claim/duties the exemption relates to.
* statement of which types of loss the exemption relates to.

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

Contra Proferentum

A

If there is any doubt as to the meaning and scope of the exemption clause, the ambiguity will be resolved against the party (proferens) seeking to rely upon it.

Clear words must be used if they are to excuse one party from liability

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

Ailsa Craig Fishing Co Ltd v Malvern Fishing Co [1983] 1 WLR 964.

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

Application of contra proferentem when clause limits rather than excludes liability

A

Rule is applied with less rigour when a clause merely limits rather than excludes liability

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

Houghton v Trafalgar Insurance [1954]

A
  • ‘for damage caused or arising whilst the car is conveying any load in excess of that for
    which it was constructed’.
  • Insurance company: “ 6 people = excess load”
  • Lord Somervell concluded that carried people did not include load
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Court is less likely to read a clause contra proferentum in a contract between…..

A

Commercial parties of equal bargaining power

Victoria Street v House of Fraser, 2011

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

Victoria Street v House of Fraser, 2011

A

“The words used, commercial sense, and the documentary and factual context are, and should
be, normally enough to determine the meaning of a contractual provision.”

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

Clarity and negligence

A

Clear words used to exclude liability for negligence

Explicit use of word “negligence” preferred.

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

Wide enough

A

Exclusion of negligence can be satisfied if the words used are wide enough - “all liability howsoever cause”

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

Distinction for general words

A

Effectiveness of general negligence words depends on :
(a) Cases where the only basis for liability is negligence
(b) Cases where the party will be liable irrespective of negligence

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

Cases where the only basis for liability is negligence

A

Traditionally would cover negligence

Canada
Steamship rules’ after the case Canada Steamship Lines v R [1952]

17
Q

Cases where the party will be liable irrespective of negligence

A

Traditionally will not cover negligence

Canada Steamship Lines v R [1952] AC

18
Q

Doubt over Canada Steamship Lines v R [1952]

A

Persimmon Homes Ltd v Ove Arup & Partners Ltd [2017]

Casts doubt over the extent to which Canada Steamship rules apply to commercial contracts.

Jaclson LJ: The contra proferentum rule has limited role in relation to commercial contracts negotiated between parties of equal bargaining power

19
Q

Canada Steamship Lines v R

A
20
Q

Persimmon Homes Ltd v Ove Arup & Partners Ltd 2017

A
21
Q

Third parties and exemption clauses

A
  • Can the clause operate to protect a person not party to the contract

Doctrine of privity of contract establishes that at common law a party outside the contract cannot benefit from its terms.

Effect of this has been reduced in certain circumstances by Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999

22
Q
A