The Pros And Cons Of Conclusion Contract

1225 Words3 Pages

An exclusion clause is a term of a contract which either limits the liability for a specific loss or injury; or the liability of one or both parties within a contract. The law on exclusion clause applies only business to business or consumer to consumer. The first way an exclusion clause is regulated is through incorporation by writing. Stuart signed a standard contract agreeing to buy six Land Rover Discovery cars from Keith at a price of £80,000. This is similarly identified in the case of L 'Estrange V Graucob [1934] in which Miss L 'Estrange signed a contract to buy a cigarette machine from the company Graucob. From this comparison it is noted that Stuart is bound by the contract and any injury or damages caused to the cars is not to be the fault of Keith 's, because Stuart has signed the contract. This is because the incorporated written …show more content…

S 11(2) indicates that after signing the contract, though Stuart did not read the contract he was aware of the circumstances if something went wrong. Stuart aware of this cannot sue Keith for the faulty car. Similar conclusions can be drawn from the case of George Mitchell v Finney Locks Seeds [1983] where the clause excluded any loss or damage from the use of the seeds. To conclude whether Tiff is correct about suing Keith for the negligence of the car, Stuart is unable to claim legal action against Keith for the faulty engine and gearbox. Stuart cannot take Keith to court because he agreed to buy the cars in the first place and signed the contract. Stuart may not necessarily have read the exclusion clause should have been aware of it anyway. Therefore, the written document indicates that there is no point for Stuart to see the exclusion clause on a sign. Although, Stuart is unable to sue Keith for the car. He can still sue for the personal injury due to Keith’s

More about The Pros And Cons Of Conclusion Contract

Open Document