Karteikarten
Terms and Exemption Clauses
Karten in diesem Stapel (31)
- 1Statement as Term: Was the statement so crucial that 'but for' the statement they would not have entered into the contractBannerman v White
- 2Statement as Term: Statements are more critical if made at the time of contracting rather then beforeRoutledge v McKay
- 3Statement as Term: Statements that are verbal are not as binding, especially if they are later omitted from written formsRoutledge v McKay
- 4Statement as Term: Verbal, non included statements can be significant if the speaker is held to have special knowledgeBirch v Paramount
- 5Statement of Term: the vendor can make an assumption of responsibility for the soundness of a sale item - this will be deemed contractualSchawel v Reade
- 6Parole evidence presumption: Presumption that external evidence cannot be used to reinterpret a contractJacobs v Batavia & General Plantations Trust
- 7The parole evidence rule is avoided by using the verbal and written contracts seperatlyHelibut Symons v Buckleton
- 8Entire agreement clauses are used (but courts don't like them as a way of dodging liability)Inntrepreneur Pub v East Crown (Axa Sun Life v Campbell Martin)
- 9Particularly onerous or unusual terms should be brought explicitly to the attention of the other partyInterfoto Picture Library v Stiletto Visual Programmes
- 10Implication into contracts onlu applies if a contract has been formedScancarriers v Aotearoa International
- 11If a term is clearly mentioned in the contract a court will not imply it inTrollope Colls v NW Regional Hospital Board
- 12Terms may be implied in as a result of normal dealings between partiesMcCutcheon v MacBrayne
- 13Terms are implied if it is obviously a needed term and would make someone go "well of course"The Moorcock / Shirlaw v Southern Foundries
- 14Terms are implied in as a matter of common law if necessary (an obligation for the landlord to repair the property)Liverpool CC v Irwin
- 15The s12 Sale of Goods Act is implied into contractsRowland v Divall
- 16s13 Sale of Goods Act is implied into contractsBeale v Taylor
- 17s14 Sale of Goods Act is implied into contractsPriest v Last
- 18Conditions/WarrantiesPoussard v Spiers and Pond
/
Bettini v Gye - 19Modern distinctions involving inomminate clauses comes from ...Honk Kong Fir v KKK
- 20Termination cannot be used absuviely, for example rejecting timber because it only 99% matches the descriptionArcos Ltd v Ronaasen
- 21An exemption clause is one that excludes or modifies an obligationPhoto Productions v Securicor Transport
- 22ExCl: Can be incorporated through signature - basis for the small print exemptionsL'Estrange v Graucob
- 23ExCl: Signature Incorporations can be invalidated by overwhelming oral assuranceCurtis v Chemical Cleaning and Dyeing Co
- 24ExCl: Incorporation through noticeParker v SE Railway (exemption SEE BACK of ticket)
- 25ExCl: Clauses through notice can be unincorporated if they are meant to be hidden (written in German)Harvey v Ventilatorenfabrik Oelde GmbH
- 26ExCl: Incorporation by course of dealing relies on constant dealingMcCutcheon v David MacBrayne
- 27ExCl: Clauses can only be incorporated before or at the time of contractOlley v Marlborough Court Hotel
- 28ExCl: They must be in the document not included in a mere receiptChapelton v Barry UDC
- 29ExCl: ContribNeg clauses must meet the test 1. Explicitly mention "Negligence" 2. Are the word wide enough 3. Are they too wideCanada Steamship Lines v R
- 30Synonym for negligence is sufficientMonarch Airlines v London Luton Airport
- 31—
Informationen
- Beschreibung
- Law Karteikarten am Terms and Exemption Clauses, erstellt von Sam White am 05/05/2018.
- Erstellt von
- Sam White
- Aufrufe
- 10
- Bewertung