• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Exclusion Clauses Scenario Question -an exclusion clause said ice skaters skate at their own risk.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

4. Professional Ice Skaters train REGULARLY . Negligence personal injury. Exclusion clause said not responsible for loss or injury sustained by users of the rink. On the ticket office and also on the back of the ticket. Was owners liable for skater?s lost income? It is obvious that the negligence of the cleaners have led to the injuries suffered by Tatiana and Igor. The main issue is whether the owners can limit or restrict their liabilities by relying on the exclusion clause displayed. It is clear that the cleaners have been negligent by leaving the machinery on ice, hence the owners ought to be vicariously liable for their acts. An exclusion clause Is a clause that aims to limit their liability. In this case, the exclusion clause aims to limit negligent performance, when a duty of care is owed by the owners under Occupier?s Liability Act 1957. ...read more.

Middle

There must also be a need for a contractual document. The exclusion clause must be contained in something which can be regarded as a contractual document. In this case, the owner would rely on the ticket which includes the exclusion clauses. In Chapelton v Barry, the plaintiff wished to hire a deck chair. He received a receipt which excluded liability for damage and personal injury. The receipt had come too late, and it was not a document which the customer would expect to find contractual terms, hence it was not incorporated. In this case , the exclusion clause on the ticket had come too late. It came after the skaters had pay the fee and was not a document which one would expect to find such contractual terms. It is most likely the case that the exclusion clause is not incorporated on the ticket. ...read more.

Conclusion

As these arise due to the negligence of the cleaner, the exclusion clause must be sufficiently clear to exempt such liability. In White v John Warrick v Sons, there was a clause that the owner relied on to exempt liability for personal injury caused by negligence. It was ambiguous hence the contra proferentum rule applied. In this case, only clauses which expressly referred to negligence will allow the party to avoid liability for negligence if the clause could not be interpreted as referring to other kinds of liability. Hence it could be said that the exclusion clause in the ice rink had not been clear enough and the owner cannot rely on it to exempt liability for personal injury. The clause will thn be interpreted in favour of Tatiana and Igor. Assuming that the exclusion clause has been incorporated due to previous course of dealings, the UCTA would negate its effect. The owners would ultimately be liable to compensate the skaters. The owners should pay the 50000 of loss of income to the skaters. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Law of Tort section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Law of Tort essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Taking selected areas of the civil and or criminal law, evaluate whether sportsmen and ...

    4 star(s)

    Other general defences can be used. Mistake could be used as a defence to a negligence action but this would normally be a mistake as to a fact which is unlikely to occur in sporting cases. Another defence would be 'inevitable accident' where it was not intended by the defendant

  2. What is the meaning of intention in English criminal law? Is it always possible ...

    Baroness Wootton agrees on this point (along with may other points made by Lord Diplock) by saying "If the law says that certain things are not to be done, it is illogical to confine this prohibition to occasions on which they are done from malice aforethought: for at least the

  1. Three liability cases - Claim 1-- Auto Emergency Breakdown Service Claim 2- Santa ...

    someone who visits the land is greater if the occupier has agreed to the visitor's presence, than if the 'visitor' is actually a trespasser. Equally, many contractual duties are fixed by law, and not by agreement; the parties must have agreed to make a contract but once that has been done, certain terms will be imposed on them by law.

  2. Jenny had an argument with her boyfriend, David, which resulted in David throwing Jenny ...

    Similarly the courts are reluctant to convict a person if he has only the mens rea of an offence and does not commit the actus reus at the same time. However in cases such as Thabo Meli v R and Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner the courts are prepared to

  1. In the scenario for this report the parties have committed certain crimes - give ...

    The polish and coffee is obviously classed as property and this is clearly set out in the theft act 1968 s.4 (1). The final constituent of the AR of theft is 'belonging to another'7.

  2. I am the company solicitor for Everlasting Estates Ltd., and have been required to ...

    Charles is employed on the site and amongst his job functions he is required to carry out some welding work. Charles has suffered an eye injury whilst using protective goggles which were defective. I am the company solicitor for Everlasting Estates Ltd., and have been required to draft a

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work