Limitation vs exclusion of liability
Language: English Series: Contract Journal ; 440(6651) 14 November 2007, 32(1)Publication details: 2007Subject(s): Summary: Highlights the risks of having clauses struck out of contracts, with reference to "Regus (UK) Limited v Epcot Solutions Limited" ([2007] EWHC 938 (Comm), L138693). In "Regus" the question was whether the exclusion clause in the Regus standard form satisfied the reasonableness test in the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 s3. It was held that the exclusion clause was too widely drafted and was unenforceable. With this in mind, provides brief advice on steps to take when drafting such provisions.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | L141584 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 141584-1001 |
Highlights the risks of having clauses struck out of contracts, with reference to "Regus (UK) Limited v Epcot Solutions Limited" ([2007] EWHC 938 (Comm), L138693). In "Regus" the question was whether the exclusion clause in the Regus standard form satisfied the reasonableness test in the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 s3. It was held that the exclusion clause was too widely drafted and was unenforceable. With this in mind, provides brief advice on steps to take when drafting such provisions.