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

Legal advice for Equipment Hire Limited.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

To: Equipment Hire Limited From: XXX Legal Advisors Subject: Legal Advice Date: 02/06/04 Abstract Equipment Hire Limited (EHL) is a business whose service is to hire out plant and equipment to both business and individuals. Sunil, a window cleaner by trade, regularly hires ladders from EHL. Sunil hired a ladder from the company to paint the outside of his house upon which he paid �50 deposit and was issued with a receipt stating an exclusion cause: 'Conditions of Hire: EHL accepts no responsibility for any loss or damage suffered as a result of use of the equipment. Hirers use the equipment at their own risk' Unfortunately due to a defect, Sunil fell of the ladder and landed on his personal radio, which was irreparably damaged, and suffered a broken leg. EHL seek legal advice as to their liability for damages, if any, concerning Sunil's broken leg and the damaged stereo. 1.0 Introduction To establish damages owing in the incident concerning the client, EHL, and their customer Sunil, the following report aims to advise EHL and distinguish differences in liability of damages regarding Sunil as a consumer and as a business. In this case EHL are attempting to exclude liability for damages with their exclusion cause. This report explores the legal rules that control contracts for The Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982, The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. ...read more.

Middle

3.0 EHL's Liability Concerning Sunil as a Consumer. EHL's receipt of hire states an exclusion cause excluding liability for injury and damages. The definition of a consumer is stated in the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 in section 12: 'where one party makes the contract in the course of business and the other does not AND any goods supplied are of a type ordinarily supplied for private use.' In this case Sunil is using the ladder to paint the outside of his house so he is hiring the ladder as a consumer. Sunil can claim for injury as section 2(1) of UCTA 1977 covers negligence liability and states: 'A Business cannot (by contract or notice) exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury resulting from negligence.' Therefore EHL's exclusion cause is deemed void and Sunil will be compensated, whether Sunil is acting as a consumer or not, as EHL have been negligent in supplying faulty goods and services as discussed in 2.0. Sunil as a consumer can also claim to replace his broken radio as section 7 - 'Miscellaneous contracts under which goods pass' of UCTA 1977; section 7(2) states: 'As against a person dealing as a consumer, liability in respect of the goods' correspondence with description or sample, or their quality or fitness for any particular purpose, cannot be excluded or restricted by reference to any such term.' ...read more.

Conclusion

Sunil could argue that he didn't know of the exclusion clause. However the terms are clearly stated on the receipt; and come under section 11(2) of the act which refers to schedule 2 of the act (appendix A). Sunil regularly hires equipment from EHL for his window cleaning trade, which means he should know the terms of hire. In court the judge will use case law. Case law in the past has decided the exclusion cause is acceptable and the company is not liable for damage, even if on the last occasion the exclusion clause was not seen, due to a course of regular dealing (Spurling v Bradshaw 1956). 867 When applying the test of reasonableness in section 11 the judge will look at the cause and see if it covers the situation. EHL's clause only seems to exclude liability for wrong of equipment only. This means EHL are liable for the Radio as well. Also when the court looks at the situation they will consider Sunil's bargaining power which schedule 2 of the act states: 'the strength of the bargaining positions of the parties relative to each other, taking into account (among other things) alternative means by which the customer's requirements could have been met.' For instance, are there any other hire companies Sunil could have gone too? If so Sunil may have been able to go elsewhere in which the incident may have never occurred. PART 1b SID Number: 0365570/1 Module Code: LWB1029 ...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 Contract 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 Contract essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Contract Law - Offer And Acceptance

    3 star(s)

    final document in the series leading to the conclusion of the contract Butler Machine Tool v Ex-Cell-O Corporation (1979) The plaintiffs offered to sell a machine to the defendants. The terms of the offer included a condition that all orders were accepted only on the sellers' terms which were to prevail over any terms and conditions in the buyers' order.

  2. Four ways in which a contract may be discharged.

    The claimant bought the house but, after spending �100.000 on improvements to it, he discovered that aircraft noise was a problem. Hamilton Jones v David and Snape [2003] EWHC 3147. The claimant sought damages because the defendant's breach of contract had allowed her husband to abduct her sons to Tunisia.

  1. LAW OF CONTRACT. LAW 103. THE CONTENT OF THE CONTRACT.

    Ormerod LJ "In the present case I would unhesitatingly hold that the stipulation that the goods were to be shipped in good condition was not a condition, and that on the facts of this case the breach did not go to the root of the contract, and that consequently the buyers were not entitled to reject the goods.

  2. Definitions of Actus reus, mens rea & strict liability

    which means that the prosecution must prove that the defendant realised he or she was taking a risk. An example of a defendant being reckless is the case of DPP v K. Coincidence of Actus Reus and Mens Rea the Contemporaneity Rule The prosecution must prove that the Mens Rea

  1. Explain what is meant by an unfair term in a contract and describe and ...

    Good faith is likely to require that contracting parties deal with each other in an open and honest way, taking into account their relative bargaining skills.4 In the case of Interfoto Picture Library Ltd V Stiletto Visual Programmes Ltd

  2. DIFFEERENT AREAS OF CONTRACT LAW

    McGhee and Skilton had both set out to commit a deliberate breach of contract by approaching the customers of their former employers in complete defiance of the restriction to which they both voluntarily agreed to and signed. The inner house of the Court of Session in McGhee and English Court of Appeal in Skilton's found in favour of the employers.

  1. "There are occasions where terms are implied into contracts which have never been discussed ...

    If there was anything the matter with the horse I would tell you". The claimant relied on this recommendation, halted his inspection ad later bought the horse. The horse was found to be unfit for stud purposes and court (Lord Moulton)

  2. Discuss the role of hardship clauses in controlling liability by contract.

    Parties enter into a contract against a particular political, social, economic and commercial background. Notwithstanding that the parties hope the background to remain substantially stable, it is often the case that the circumstances alter fundamentally and quickly in a way which the parties do not foresee or expect and cannot control.

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