• 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

    "The requirement of consideration is an unnecessary complication in the formation of contracts."

    4 star(s)

    were none pre-existing contractual relationship between the parties and yet the judges decided in favor of the claimant. This may be justified by the argument that the objective of the doctrine is to avoid the situation where a party is led to suffer a detriment, being so, the courts should be able to extend the restrictions imposed to achieve this.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Contract Law - Offer And Acceptance

    3 star(s)

    The buyers issued a writ claiming damages for breach of the contract. The House of Lords held that the service of the writ should be set aside because the contract had not been made within the court's jurisdiction. Lord Wilberforce stated that the present case is, as Entores itself, the

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

    The efficiency of the new turbines was so much greater that even if the British Westinghouse turbines had complied with the contract it would still have been advantageous to replace them with the new ones. Mitigation and anticipatory breach. There is no duty to mitigate loss until there is an actual breach.

  2. Void and voidable Contracts.

    As can be seen clearly by the above case there is defiantly a breach of warranty by the oil company, and therefore it gives Dan every right to sue for negligent misrepresentation. 5. In this case Omar has worked for several years for a firm of architects who operate within the West Midlands area.

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

    The test is: does the occurrence of the event deprive the party who has further undertakings still to perform of substantially the whole benefit which it was the intention of the parties as expressed in the contract that he should obtain as the consideration for performing those undertakings?" Answer 4.

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

    The two most important types are intention and recklessness. Intention Direct intention was defined in the case of Mohan as '' a decision to bring about in so far as it lies within the accused's power, the commission of the offence.

  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

    Relevant case Faccenda Chicken ltd v Fowler (1986) - Fowler was employed in a position of sales manager with Faccenda chicken ltd. He worked for the company for 7 years and played a prominent role in the creation and expansion of the company refrigerated poultry selling operations. The company operated a fleet of refrigerated vans which travelled around

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