They cannot therefore be sued for trespass although it may be considered a nuisance at common Law. When an act is authorised by statute it would be assumed that all future consequences would have been taken into account. For example in the beginning of the railway system it was not always possible to prevent the escape of spark therefore the railway company could not be held responsible for any fire caused by the escape of sparks. In Fisher v Ruislip UDC  Ruislip council had been authorised to provide air raid shelters in or on the highway under the Civil Defence Act 1939.
Good conclusions usually refer back to the question or title and address it directly - for example by using key words from the title.
How well do you think these conclusions address the title or question? Answering these questions should help you find out.
Do they use key words from the title or question?
Do they answer the question directly?
Can you work out the question or title just by reading the conclusion?
To sum up my essay I would say that I agree with the decision of the House of Lords because as said in court, the evidence is compelling that sending the mother and son back to Lebanon would completely tear apart the essence of their family life as the mother would be charged with kidnap and due to Lebanese law the child would be handed over to the father, and still if the father were found to be unfit as the parent, the son would be passed to the paternal grandfather or a member of the fathers family, not however the mother. I can see the reasons for the case against her because in a way once she would be back in Lebanon she would no longer have that right since Lebanon is not a member of the convention however essentially it would be down to the United Kingdom for not respecting EM's right to a family life."
"In conclusion invitations to treat and inquiries are not offers, therefore this in law will not amount to an offer, however if there is an offer and it is specific between 2 people, then this will be deemed as a legitimate offer. Similarly if the offer is implied it can still be deemed to be an offer.
By Ford-Western 13L"
"In conclusion I would say that the effect of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 on whether a term is to be deemed fair or unfair prevents an injustice on consumers who may not have strong bargaining power against larger corporations. The regulations have also given more qualifying bodies the right to take action against unfair contracts which will most likely help decrease the level of unfair terms in future contracts and greater equality for consumers.
An advantage of the 1999 regulations is that they take into account the previous 1977 and 1994 regulations which mean that there is greater protection for consumers from unfair terms.
The fact that the regulations are confined in their scope to consumer contract means that it is kept out of the commercial sphere where the need for certainty is greatest. So the uncertainty which the regulations will initially create is not the grave cause for concern which it would be if it applied to international contracts for the sale of goods.16
Overall the 1999 Regulations have had a significant effect on unfair terms, which will must likely result in a decrease of unfair terms being used in contracts."
Marked by a teacher
This document has been marked by one of our great teachers. You can read
the full teachers notes when you download the document.
This document has been reviewed by one of our specialist student essay
reviewing squad. Read the full review on the document page.
This document has been reviewed by one of our specialist student document
reviewing squad. Read the full review under the document preview on this page.