| 000 | 01139cab a22002175a 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | L141584 | ||
| 008 | 071203e20071114xxk f 000 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u141584 | ||
| 041 | 0 | _aeng | |
| 100 | 1 | _aSanderson, Paul | |
| 245 | 0 | 0 | _aLimitation vs exclusion of liability |
| 260 | _c2007 | ||
| 490 | 0 |
_aContract Journal _v440(6651) 14 November 2007, 32(1) |
|
| 520 | _aHighlights 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. | ||
| 590 | _aKA | ||
| 650 | 2 | 4 | _aREGUS (UK) LTD V EPCOT SOLUTIONS LTD |
| 650 | 2 | 4 | _aUNFAIR CONTRACT TERMS ACT 1977 S3 |
| 651 | 4 |
_aEngland and Wales _y1543- |
|
| 690 | _aBUILT ENVIRONMENT-CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT-BUILDING CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 999 |
_c79526 _d79526 |
||