xs
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

#2229 - Ucta Requirements - Contract Law

Notice: PDF Preview
The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Contract Law Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting.
See Original

Claims in Negligence

  • Is there business liability?(s.1 UCTA)

    • S.1(3) Breach of obligation or duties arising

      • S.1(3)(a) from things done or to be done in the course of a person’s business

      • S.1(3)(b) or from the occupation of premises used for business purposes of the occupier

      • S.14(a): business = a profession and the activities of any government department or local or public authority

    • If NO = UCTA has no application

    • If YES = Continue to next question

  • Claim in negligence (s.2 UCTA)

    • Personal Injury

      • S.2(1) Person cannot be reference to any contract term or notice given

        • Exclude or restrict his liability for personal injury or death from negligence

    • Other Loss or damage

      • S.2(2) Person cannot exclude liability for this damage

        • Unless he satisfies the reasonableness test:

          • S.11 (3)

            • should be fair and reasonable to allow reliance on notice/term

              • having regard to all the circumstances obtaining when the liability would have arisen.

      • Phillips Products Ltd v Hyland [1987] H hired out excavator to P with operator. Operator negligently damaged P’s chimney. H tried to exclude liability by clause in contract which made P responsible for all actions of Operator during hire. H argued that they had transferred liability to P

        • Slade LJ:

          • Ordinary and sensible meaning of the words in context of s.2(2)

            • Mean that transfer of liability from A to B necessarily and inevitably involves the exclusion of liability so far as A is concerned.

          • Ergo, test falls within ambit of s.2(2) and is subject to reasonableness test.

      • Thompson v T Lohan (Plant Hire) Ltd [1987] Similar fact and exclusion above, except X was killed by negligent driving of operator. C sued H (hirer) who pointed to exclusion clause transferring liability to hiree (L).

        • Fox LJ

          • UCTA 1977 s.2(1) not concerned with arrangements between businesses about who will bear liability

            • It is only concerned with preventing the victim from having liability excluded in totality.

          • No exclusion here – merely arrangement between H and L about who will take consequences of negligence.

        • Burrows: Key difference = on facts of case

          • Exclusion of liability to H in this case did not operate to transfer any liability from the tortfeasor

            • To the actual victim of the tort (as in Phillips)

              • But to a third party not injured by the tort.

          • Thus UCTA s.2 had no application.


Claims in Contract under UCTA 1977

  • Is there business liability?(s.1 UCTA)

    • S.1(3) Breach of obligation or duties arising

      • S.1(3)(a) from things done or to be done in the course of a person’s business

      • S.1(3)(b) or from the occupation of premises used for business purposes of the occupier

      • S.14(a): business = a profession and the activities of any government department or local or public authority

    • If NO = UCTA has no application but UTCCR might – continue to blue

    • If YES = Continue to next question

  • Are you a consumer? (UCTA s.12 and s.3)(UTCCR reg3(1))

    • IF YOU

      • S.12(1)(a) neither make the contract in the course of a business nor hold yourself out as doing so;

        • R & B Customs Brokers v UDT [1988]: C (business) bought company car for managing director of shipping company. Was defective, but D excluded all defectiveness liability.

          • Dillon LJ:

            • “Course of business” should be construed narrowly.

            • Should only apply when

              • The chattel should be an integral part of the business (here, car is not integral part of C’s shipping company)

                • With a degree of regularity with its use

                  • Unless that one off activity would itself constitute a trade.

            • Therefore, matters merely incidental to the business

              • Are not “in the course of” it.

                • And C therefore falls within consumer protection for UCTA 1977.

          • Burrows:

            • Strongly arguable that companies always deal within course of business

            • Purchase of car was for purposes related to the business, if not integral part thereof.

              • Isn’t it better that a consumer is construed narrowly per UTCCR reg.3(1)?

      • AND S.12(1)(b) the other party does make the contract in the course of a business; AND

      • AND S.12(2)(a)+(b) you aren’t buying goods sold by auction or by competitive tender.

      • AND S.12(3) The party alleging you aren’t a consumer can’t prove it

        • You are a consumer for the purposes of UCTA 1977

    • IF NOT

      • Are you acting on the other’s written standard terms of business?

        • IF YES: then you may have remedies within s.3 and s.6 + 7 and s.13 of UCTA 1977 (but none with UTCCR).

        • IF NOT: Act has no application in contract

          • S.3(1) This section only applies where one party deals as a consumer

            • Or on the other’s written standard terms of business.


Where C is not acting in the course of business (and therefore is acting as a consumer) and D is: Remedies

  • Unfair indemnity (UCTA 1977 s.4)

    • S.4(1) Consumer cannot by any contract term

      • be made to indemnify any person (whether contracting party of third party)

        • in respect of liability that may be incurred by the other for negligence or breach of contract,

          • except to extent contract term satisfies reasonableness test.

    • S.11(1) In relation to a contract term, the requirement of reasonableness

      • is that the term shall have been a fair and reasonable one to be included

        • having regard to the circumstances which were, or ought reasonably to have been,

          • known to or in the contemplation of the parties when the contract was made.

    • S.4(2) This section applies whether the liability in question—

      • (a) is directly that of the person to be indemnified or is incurred by him vicariously;

      • (b) is to the person dealing as consumer or to someone else.

  • Disputes arising from guarantees of goods (s.5)

    • Are the goods within “consumer use”?

      • They are when

        • S.5(2)(a)

          • a person is using them, or has them in his possession for use,

            • NOT exclusively for the purposes of a business;

      • IF SO

        • Is there a guarantee given by other party?

          • s.5(2)(b)

            • Guarantee = anything in writing

              • if it contains/purports some promise or assurance that defects will be made good fully or partially in some way

        • IF SO

          • Where loss or damage—

            • S.5(1)(a) arises from the goods proving defective while in consumer use; and

            • S.3(1)(b) results from the negligence of a person concerned in the manufacture/distribution

              • liability ... cannot be excluded or restricted by reference to

                • a contract term or

                • OR a notice contained in

                • OR a reference to

                  • The guarantee of the goods.

Where C is not acting within the course of business (A CONSUMER) OR C is operating under D’s standard terms of business: Remedies

  • Liability in Contract (s.3)

    • S.3(2) the party (D) who is not a consumer nor operating under D’s standard terms of business cannot by reference to any contract term—

      • (a) when in breach of contract,

        • exclude or restrict any liability of his in respect of the breach;

      • OR (b) claim to be entitled—

        • (i) to render a contractual performance substantially different from that which was reasonably expected of him, or

        • (ii) to render no performance at all for some or part of his obligations

          • except in so far the contract term satisfies the reasonableness test under s.11.

  • Sale and hire of goods (s.6) (this concerns implied terms)

    • If you are a consumer or are operating under X’s standard terms:

    • ONLY If you are consumer

      • S.6(2) X cannot exclude or limit liability for breach of the obligations arising from—

        • S.6(2)(a) [ss. 13, 14 or 15 of the 1979 Act] (seller's implied undertakings as to conformity of goods with description or sample, or as to their quality or fitness for a particular purpose);

        • S.6(2)(b) ss. 9, 10 or 11 of the 1973 Act (the corresponding things in relation to hire-purchase),

    • If you aren’t a consumer but are operating under X’s standard terms

      • S.6(3) liability specified in subsection (2) can be excluded or restricted by reference to a contract term,

        • but only in so far as the term satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.

          • S.11(2): Regard given to SCH 2

            • BUT this subsection does not prevent the court from holding that term in question is not a term of the contract.

    • S.7b has the same effect where the contract is not governed by the law of sale of goods or hire purchase.

  • Exemption clauses (s.13)

    • S.13(1) X is prevented from

      • (a) making the liability/enforcement subject to restrictive or onerous conditions

      • (b) excluding/restricting/prejudicing any right or remedy for liability

      • (c) excluding or restricting rules of evidence or procedure;

        • S.2, 5 – 7 are to be construed in the same light as s.13.

    • S.13(2) Arbitration agreement in writing not under s.13(1)(b+c)

  • Restriction of Liability (s.11)

    • S.11(4) Whether notice or term is reasonable

      • regard shall be had in particular (but without prejudice to SCH 2 for contract terms) to—

        • (a) the resources which X could expect to be available to him for the purpose of meeting the liability should it arise; and

        • (b) how far it was open to him to cover himself by insurance.

UCTTR 1999 Requirements

  • Are you a consumer?

    • UTCCR reg 3(1) If you are:

      • A natural person...

        • Acting for purposes outside your business, trade or profession.

      • Chen Wishart: and you can prove it.

      • And you are in a contract with a seller of supplier

        • Reg3(1) who...

Unlock the full document,
purchase it now!
Contract Law

More Contract Law Samples

A Simple Guide To Consideration ... Breach And Damages Notes Breach And Remedies For Breach N... Breach Of Contract Pq Notes Notes Certainty Pq Notes Notes Commentary On Contract (Rights O... Consideration And Estoppel Inte... Consideration Notes Consideration Pq Notes Notes Consideration Promissory Estop... Consideration Theory Notes Consumer Rights Act 2015 Notes Content Exclusion Clauses Notes Contents Of Contracts Interpre... Contract Law Problem Question Su... Contract Notes Contract (Rights Of Third Partie... Contractual Terms, Incorporation... Damages Introduction To Remedie... Debates Enforcing Performance ... Doctrine Of Frustration Notes Doctrine Of Mistake Notes Duress Notes Duress Notes Duress Notes Duress Pq Notes Notes Enforceability Consideration A... Estoppel Notes Exclusion Clauses Notes Frustration And Termination Notes Frustration Pq Notes Notes Frustration Pq Notes Great Peace Shipping Ltd V Tsavl... Identifying Contractual Terms Notes Implied Terms And Construction O... Implied Terms Notes Implied Terms In Fact And Law Te... Inequality Of Bargaining Power D... Intent To Create Legal Relations... Interpretation Notes Interpretation Notes & Debates N... Is A Signature Really Agreement ... Is There Actually A Doctrine Of ... Misrepresentation Notes Misrepresentation Notes Misrepresentation Notes Misrepresentation Notes Misrepresentation Notes Misrepresentation Pq Notes 2 Notes Misrepresentation Pq Notes Notes Misrepresentation Pq Notes Misrepresentation Requirements N... Mistake And Frustration Notes Mistake And Frustration Notes Mistake Notes Mistake Of Common Law, Equity An... Mistakes Pq Notes Notes Non Commercial Guarantees And Un... Offer Acceptance Certainty In... Offer, Acceptance, Intention, Ce... Offer And Acceptance Bilateral... Offer And Acceptance Certainty ... Offer And Acceptance Notes Offer And Acceptance Notes Offer And Acceptance Pq Notes ... Offer And Acceptance Unilatera... Other Remedies Notes Performance Of Pre Existing Duty... Privity Contracts And Third Pa... Privity Notes Privity Notes Privity Of Contract Notes Privity Pq Notes Notes Privity Theory Notes Promisee Remedies In Contract Fo... Promissory Estoppel Notes Promissory Estoppel Pq Notes Rectification Notes & Cases Remedies Notes Remedies For Breach Pq Notes N... Remedies For Misrepresentation N... Requirements For Consideration N... Royal Bank Of Scotland V Ettridg... Should We Have A General Doctrin... Specific Remedies Notes Termination, Damages, Specific P... Termination Notes Termination Of Contract Notes Terms Of Contract Notes Terms Of The Contract Essay Plan... Terms Of The Contract Pq & Essa... The Concept Of Consideration Notes The Need For Certainty Over Term... The Problem Of Certainty Notes Undue Influence And Unconscionab... Undue Influence Notes Undue Influence, Duress And Expl... Undue Influence Pq Notes Notes Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 N... Unreasonable Terms Notes What Are The Requirements Of An ... What Constitutes Acceptance Notes What Is The Privity Doctrine Notes Working Guide To Damages Notes