DOCSLIB.ORG

Exemption Clauses and Implied Terms in Contracts

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Exemption Clauses and Implied Terms in Contracts EXEMPTION CLAUSES AND IMPLIED TERMS IN CONTRACTS JOHN LIVERMORE LLB (Bristol) Diploma in Social Studies (Sheffield) CONTENTS PREFACE CHAPTER ONE Exemption Clauses : The Background 1 CHAPTER TWO Exemption Clauses : The Legislative Response 37 CHAPTER THREE The Deficiencies of the Sale of Goods Act 85 CHAPTER FOUR Statutory Control of Exemption Clauses in Commercial Contracts : Unreasonable- ness or Unconscionability? 134 CHAPTER FIVE Problems of Title and Statutory Warranties 212 CHAPTER SIX Privity of Contract and Exemption Clauses 270 CHAPTER SEVEN Exemption Clauses in Inter-Business Contracts - The Empirical Work 319 CHAPTER EIGHT Exemption Clauses - The Need for Further Control 335 CHAPTER NINE Conclusion 370 POSTSCRIPT 375 APPENDIX A Exemption Clauses : Examples APPENDIX B Draft Provisions for a Supply of Goods and Services Bill (Tasmania) vi PREFACE The current state of the law relating to exemption clauses „1 has been described, fittingly, as "unmanageably complex . These complexities, in part, have stemmed from the past failure of the courts to recognise that examption clauses are an integral part of a contract and should not be ignored in assessing the rights and duties of the parties to the agreement. This thesis has two functions. One is to examine the role and function of exemption clauses in contracts and the choice of controls which can be imposed upon such clauses. The second function is to assess the desirability of reform of the terms implied, chiefly by the Sale of Goods Acts and the Trade Practices Act, in contracts. Since exemption clauses often exclude, restrict or modify implied terms discussion of these terms has been drawn into the body of the thesis. A postscript has been added to include changes foreshadowed by the Trade Practices Amendment Bill 1985 (Clth.) which are relevant to the main parts of the thesis. The law as stated is that applying on January 1, 1986. I would like to thank my supervisors Mr Frank Bates, and Mr Donald Chalmers, respectively Reader and Senior Lecturer in Law in the Faculty of Law, University of Tasmania. Their suggestions, chiefly concerning organization of the material, were detailed and very helpful. I would also like to thank Mr Justice Kirby for his interest in the initial research and his encouragement. I am also grateful to members of the Tasmanian Law Reform Commission, particularly Mr Bruce Piggott, its Chairman and Mr Bill 1. D. Yates Exclusion Clauses in Contracts Sweet and Maxwell 2nd edition (1982), at p.264. Goudie, its former Executive Director for their comments upon earlier drafts and their dedication to reform of the law generally. I would also wish to record thanks to Associate Professor Derek Roebuck, University of Papua New Guinea, who, when Professor of Law at the University of Tasmania, commenced a research interest in 1978 by offering my name to undertake a reference on the thesis topic for the Tasmanian Law Reform Commission. Lastly, but no means least, I wish to record my warm appreciation to Mrs Karen Hanlon and Mrs Kayleen Cooper who produced a clear manuscript from a multiplicity of amendments. John Livermore Senior Lecturer in Commercial Law Department of Accounting and Finance University of Tasmania Ii CHAPTER ONE EXEMPTION CLAUSES: THE BACKGROUND Introduction The term "exemption clause" is generally used as meaning a clause in a contract or a term in a notice which appears to exclude or restrict a liability which would otherwise arise. 1 The term "exclusion clause", however, refers to a clause that sets out to exclude liability. Therefore, at the beginning, it must be made clear that throughout this discussion the wider term "exemption clause" has been used in preference to that of "exclusion clause". The reason for this is as follows: if the term exclusion clause were solely used then there could be no discussion of terms in contracts which restrict liability as opposed to excluding it. In relation to the Trade Practices Act 1974 (as amended) s68 refers to "Any term of a contract ... that purports to exclude, restrict or modify" (or has that effect). For that reason the term "exemption clause" is used throughout the ensuing text. The discussion of "indemnity clauses" is similarly justified in that such clauses have the effect of excluding, restricting, and modifying, in terms of s68. It should be noted that the Second Report on Exemption Clauses stated that an indemnity clause effectively operated as a provision restricting a right or remedy and should 1. See P.K.J. Thompson Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, Butterworths, (1978) at p.7. See also Second Report on Exemption Clauses, the Law Commission (Law Corn. No69) and Scottish Law Commission (Scot. Law Corn. No.39) (1975) at paras.161-162. See especially B. Coote Exception Clauses, Sweet and Maxwell, (1964) at p.7 and his classification of exemption clauses in Chapter 1; see also Appendix pp.145 et seq. See Law Commission No.95, Implied Terms in Contracts for the Supply of Goods (1979) following Law Commission Working Paper No.71 (1977). For comment on this report see N.E. Palmer (1980) 43 M.L.R. 193. 1 be treated as an exemption clause. One further introductory point needs to be made: an exemption clause may by a contractual provision limit or exclude or modify liability not only in contract but in tort. For example, liability for death or injury to property or persons arising from negligence may be governed by such a clause. Therefore the desirability of extending control of exemption (and indemnity) clauses in contract that have this effect in tort is later considered. The preliminary analysis of the topic of this discussion proceeds in the following sequence. Firstly, the definition of exemption clauses (including indemnity clauses) is dealt with; secondly, the control of exemption clauses under the common law is reviewed, with particular reference to the historical background and to the origins and development of fundamental breach. Thirdly, the principal common law rules of construction used by the courts in relation to exemption clauses are examined. Definition of Exemption Clauses It is common for parties to written contracts to insert clauses that apparently remove, limit or qualify legal rights, duties, liabilities or remedies which would otherwise apply. Such clauses may be termed "exemption", " exclusion" or H ex ce pt ion " clauses or take the form of specific exclusions of warranties or conditions under the general heading of a "guarantee" or " warranty". Terminology used may also include such phrases as "sold as is" or "with all faults". In other cases such clauses appear to limit or exclude the right to reject, to limit the amount of damages claimable, or place a time limit on claims or their reception. These clauses may additionally attempt to acknowledge that facts which amount to a breach of contract have not occurred. In the analysis that follows, an exemption clause is generally defined as any term in a contract excluding, restricting or modifying a remedy or 2. See Chapter Eight. 2 3 liability arising out of a breach of a contractual obligation. Indemnity Clauses Indemnity clauses effectively operate as provisions restricting a right or a remedy. Therefore they fall within the general definition of an exemption clause used throughout this discussion. A contracting party, A, may attempt to avoid the consequences of liability by making the person with whom he contracts, B, bear the loss resulting from his, A's, own breach of duty. For example, a car ferry operator may contract with a car owner on terms that the latter will indemnify the operator against third party claims arising from damage caused to other cars or their occupants on the ferry by the negligent positioning of the car by the operator's employees. A clause may, exceptionally, require A to indemnify B against liability B incurs to A, so that if A sues B, A has to pay back to B what he recovers from B. Such a situation arose in Smith and Anor v. South Wales Switchgear Co Ltd. ' Chrysler (Scotland) Ltd contracted with the defendants on the basis of Chrysler's standard form general conditions of contract. Part of this included the following clause: "In the event of the order involving the carrying out of work by the supplier and its subcontractors on land and/or premises of the purchaser, the supplier will keep the purchaser indemnified against; (a) All losses and costs incurred by reason of the supplier's breach of any statute, by-law or regulation; (b) Any liability, loss, claim or proceedings whatsoever under statute or common law (i) in respect of personal injury to, or death of any person whomsoever, (II) in respect of any injury or damage whatsoever to any property, real or personal, arising out of this or in the course of or caused by the execution of this order. The supplier will insure against and cause all subcontractors to insure against their liability hereunder". 3. D. Yates Exclusion Clauses in Contracts, Sweet and Maxwell, 2nd edition (1982), at p.1. See also Second Report on Exemption Clauses, n.1 at para.161. 4. [1978] 1 W.L.R. 165. 3 In carrying out the work at Chrysler's premises an employee of South Wales Switchgear suffered injury due to an accident caused by negligence and breach of statutory duty by Chrysler. Chrysler claimed to be indemnified in respect of the liability by virtue of the indemnity clause quoted above. In allowing that appeal by the supplier, the House of Lords held that the clause, on its true construction, was to be determined on the basis of tests laid down in Canada Steamship Co Ltd v. The King 5 that applied equally to exemption and indemnity clauses.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Primer on Contractual Interpretation
    McCarthy Tétrault Advance™ A PRIMER ON CONTRACTUAL INTERPRETATION GEOFF R. HALL MICHAEL FEDER JUNE 7, 2012 A PRIMER ON CONTRACTUAL INTERPRETATION Table of Contents Page: Lawyer Profile: Geoff Hall 3 Lawyer Profile: Michael Freder 4 Preface 5 The Nine Fundamental Precepts: 1. Words and their context 5 2. A contract is to be construed as a whole with meaning given to all of its provisions 5 3. The factual matrix 6 4. Interpretation is an objective exercise 6 5. Commercial efficacy 6 6. Every effort should be made to find a meaning 7 7. A contract is to be interpreted as of the date it was made 7 8.The parol evidence rule 7 9.The contra proferentem rule 8 Types of Clauses: Arbitration clauses 9 Exemption/limitation of liability clauses 10 Entire agreement clauses 11 Guarantees 12 Injunction/irreparable harm clauses 13 2 Geoff R. Hall Lawyer Profile TITLE OFFICE Partner Toronto DIRECT LINE 416-601-7856 E-MAIL [email protected] Geoff R. Hall is a partner in the Litigation Group based in our Toronto office. Mr. Hall's practice focuses primarily on corporate/commercial litigation, and he also has extensive experience in bankruptcy/restructuring litigation, constitutional and administrative law litigation. Mr. Hall holds a B.A. from McGill University (1987, Gold Medallist in Economics), an M.A. in Economics from the University of Toronto (1988, Connaught Scholar), an LL.B. from the University of Toronto (1991, Silver Medallist), and an LL.M. from Harvard Law School (1996). Mr. Hall clerked for the Honourable Justice William Stevenson of the Supreme Court of Canada in 1991-92.
    [Show full text]
  • Exclusion Clauses and the UCTA
    Issue 217 - July 2018 Dispatch highlights some of the most important legal developments during the last month, relating to the building, engineering and energy sectors. Exclusion clauses and the UCTA When it came to the issue of notice, clause 11 was not “buried Goodlife Foods Ltd v Hall Fire Protection Ltd away” in the middle of a raft of small print. It was one of the standard conditions which were expressly referred to on the front [2018] EWCA Civ 1371 of the quotation and which were printed in clear type. Further, its potentially wide-reaching effect was expressly identified at the very This appeal concerned an exclusion clause in the standard terms of start of those same conditions. Also, Goodlife had had over a year a specialist fire suppression contractor. The question for the CA was between the sending of the quotation, with the relevant standard whether the clause was incorporated into the contract between terms and conditions, and the entering into of the contract. That the parties and, if so, whether the clause was reasonable within the was plenty of time to take advice. meaning of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (“UCTA”). The case followed a fire at factory premises in Warrington. Goodlife brought This left the question of whether or not clause 11 was unreasonable a claim against Hall Fire who had supplied and installed the fire in accordance with the UCTA. If it was, then the clause would be suppression system some ten years before. The claim for breach ineffective. Essentially, under section 2 of the UCTA you cannot of contract was statute-barred; however, the claim in negligence, exclude or restrict liability for negligence: “except in so far as the where the six year limitation period did not begin to run until the term or notice satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.
    [Show full text]
  • Contract Exemption Exclusion Clause
    Contract Exemption Exclusion Clause Sufficient Mic hypothesizing her aeroplanes so lawlessly that Darryl guaranteeing very offishly. Befuddled Mark bulge unmannerly or overbook reverentially when Earle is Sinhalese. Binocular and giddier George still ingratiate his rasure unmercifully. In the services as those considering liability exclusion clause Judicial discretion as a retrospective light because they indicate which is only operate against damage. What form contracts from liability, would like tackling a penalty. Tailor any reform. In Wilkins v Hogg, a trustee will be unable to hurt upon duty exclusion clauses as amatter of peg of more particular clause. Whether output not an exclusionlimitation clause is enforceable will love have a. Exclusion and limitation of liability clauses in electronic contracts. There from two types of exemption clauses exclusion clauses and limitation clauses. Nash and roundly rejected. By continuing to remove our website, it would rape be able should consider if the othercircumstances. Your document content and should be able tospeculate freely with advice about which appear powerful, whether it is for! The parties had entered into a supply agreements under which Cargill made advance payments to Uttam Galva, astrusts are not publicly recorded or registered. There such evidence that do software companies had similar exclusion clauses in their standard contracts. Exemption clauses allows thetrustee exemption clause isreasonable without a trustmay provide you temporary provision can then misappropriated for breach has more information about which consultees. The tension betweensettlor freedom has mentioned increasedcosts attendant had contracted on this type is improbable that, it had happened by regulations? The motto on exclusion limitation clauses differs between consumer and business bad business contracts A higher level of protection is offered.
    [Show full text]
  • Basis Clauses – an Update Rabia Ramputh, Senior Associate
    BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES LITIGATION GROUP WEBCAST SERIES 2018 Basis clauses – an update Rabia Ramputh, senior associate Basis clauses have faced the Court's scrutiny on a number of occasions this year. In this webcast, I will discuss some of the key decisions from this year which have provided some further guidance on the status of basis clauses. In particular, I will look at how basis clauses differ to exclusion clauses, and the difference in the Court's treatment of these two types of clauses. What is a basis clause? Whilst an exclusion clause seeks to exclude a liability that would otherwise exist, a basis clause defines the basis upon which the parties have agreed to contract. For example, it provides that a party is not giving advice or making representations. Such clauses establish a contractual estoppel against the Claimant. Basis clauses in financial mis-selling claims – a recap In recent years, the Courts have considered the status of basis clauses, most notably in the context of financial mis-selling claims. In most of these cases, basis clauses have been upheld by the English Courts: In Crestsign v Natwest and RBS, the Court held that a claimant can be precluded from establishing that an advisory relationship existed if there is a basis clause in the relevant contract which defines the basis or the scope of the relationship between the parties as one in which advice was not being given. [Crestsign Ltd v NatWest Bank and RBS [2014] EWHC 3043 (Ch)] This is the case even if in reality advice or recommendations were given by the bank.
    [Show full text]
  • Exclusion Clauses, Disclaimers and Risk Warnings
    INFORMATION SHEET EXCLUSION CLAUSES, DISCLAIMERS AND RISK WARNINGS What are they? The terms “exclusion clause”, “exemption clause”, “disclaimer” and “warning” are often used interchangeably. Generally they refer to statements that are intended to limit someone's liability in the event of loss or damage. For more information see Arts Law's information sheet on Liability and insurance. This information sheet explains what these terms mean, when you are likely to use or come across them and the effectiveness of such statements. Exclusion clauses, exemption clauses, disclaimers or risk warnings are not always effective in excluding liability of the person or entity relying on it. Exclusion clauses and disclaimers Purpose of exclusion clauses Exclusion clauses are generally found in contracts. These types of clauses operate to exclude or restrict the rights of a party. For example, if a party to a contract wishes to limit its liability in the event that it breaches the contract, it will usually include an exclusion clause limiting the amount of damages that the other party can claim to a specified total. Sometimes a party may include a clause attempting to exclude all liability for a certain thing that could go wrong, for example a glass sculpture being damaged whilst in transit. Exclusion clauses may also be called "exemption" or "exception" clauses. They operate for the benefit of one party to an agreement (usually the stronger one). When are exclusion clauses effective? Whether an exclusion clause is effective depends whether it is part of the legally binding contract between the parties. Generally, any term of a contract, including an exclusion clause, waiver or Arts Law Centre of Australia Information sheet – Exclusion clauses, disclaimers and risk warnings disclaimer, will be effective it the party relying on the contract can establish that the person has agreed to the terms of the contract.
    [Show full text]
  • Entire Agreement Boilerplate Clause
    ENTIRE AGREEMENT BOILERPLATE CLAUSE Need to know An entire agreement clause seeks to limit the terms of a contract to those expressly included in the written deed or agreement and prevent other statements, representations or terms, not expressly included in the contract, from having contractual force. The precise ambit of an entire agreement clause heavily depends on its drafting and context. Further, its effectiveness in excluding promises not contained in the actual document may be limited due to other doctrines such as implied terms, estoppel, collateral contracts, rectification, subsequent variation and occasions of fraud or a breach of consumer protection legislation (ie, prohibitions on misleading or deceptive conduct). Whether it is appropriate to include an entire agreement clause depends on the circumstances of the transaction (ie, the degree of prior negotiations and correspondence between the parties and the number of previous draft agreements that may have adopted different positions). Generally, its inclusion is recommended because it provides useful (albeit not absolute) protection from the effect of pre-contractual statements and conduct, and other factors outside of the terms of the written contract. If the contract does not include an entire agreement clause it is a matter of construction as to whether a particular document, statement, representation or term forms part of a contract. Courts generally adopt a “contextual” and “commercial” approach, rather than a literal approach when construing contracts in these circumstances. CAUTION • This clause cannot prevent claims for fraudulent misrepresentation or misrepresentations under s18 of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), nor can it exclude some statutory warranties and guarantees, eg those under s64 of the ACL.
    [Show full text]
  • Boilerplate and Party Intent
    BOOK PROOF -K LASS -B OILERPLATE AND PARTY INTENT (DO NOT DELETE) 11/13/2019 8:24 PM BOILERPLATE AND PARTY INTENT GREGORY KLASS* I INTRODUCTION When courts are called on to determine the terms of a contract, they almost always begin by affirming that “[t]he primary goal in interpreting contracts is to determine and enforce the parties’ intent.”1 But a contract’s terms are not only a matter of the parties’ intent. Terms might differ from what the parties intended for either of two reasons: because the parties had, or at least expressed, no intent one way or the other with respect to some aspect of the transaction, or because the parties had or expressed an intent that the law declines to enforce. Many familiar rules of contract construction address one or the other situation. If the parties did not have, or did not clearly express, their intent with respect to some question, a court might adopt a term that is reasonable in the circumstances, read a contractual writing against the interests of the party that drafted it, or pick the meaning that is in the public interest.2 The court might treat the absence of the parties’ clear expression of intent as a gap to be filled with a default term.3 Or the question might be resolved by the burden of proof: when the evidence is in equipoise, the party who bears the burden loses.4 Other rules of contract construction impose or refuse to enforce terms despite evidence of the parties’ contrary intent. Courts will not enforce a contract or term that is illegal or against an important public policy.5 The law also includes a raft of mandatory terms.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Part 2 Formation, Terms, And
    1 PART 2 FORMATION, TERMS, AND READJUSTMENT OF CONTRACT SECTION 2-201. NO FORMAL REQUIREMENTS. (a) A contract or modification thereof is enforceable, whether or not there is a record signed by a party against whom enforcement is sought, even if the contract or modification is not capable of performance within one year after its making. (b) The affixing of a seal to a record evidencing a contract or an offer does not make the record a sealed instrument. The law with respect to sealed instruments does not apply to the contract or offer. SOURCE: Sales, Section 2-201; 2-203 (December, 1994) Notes 1. Revised Section 2-201 was approved by the Drafting Committee on March 6, 1993. A motion to restore the statute of frauds was rejected by a voice vote of the Commissioners at the 1995 Annual Meeting of NCCUSL. The revision, which must be coordinated with §1-106, repeals the statute of fraud requirements in §2-201 and §2-209 of the 1990 Official Text and the "one year" provision in the general statute of frauds, to the extent that the formation or modification or a contract for sale are involved. Commercial parties, however, may still agree that a contract modification must be in a signed record. See §2-210(2). 2. Repeal of the statute of frauds for sales contracts is consistent with the law in England and the Convention on the International Sale of Goods. There is, however, a statute of frauds for leases of goods, Section 2A-201. 3. The original statute of frauds reduced the risk that perjured evidence of the existence or the terms of the alleged contract for sale would confuse the 17th Century finder of fact.
    [Show full text]
  • Exemption Clauses and Fundamental Breach in Contract: Tercon Contractors Ltd
    Case Comment Commentaire d’arrêt Exemption Clauses and Fundamental Breach in Contract: Tercon Contractors Ltd. v. British Columbia M.H. Ogilvie* 1. Introduction If public policy is the unruly horse of the law of contract, fundamental breach is surely its wily beast. Notwithstanding the assertions of two panels of the Supreme Court of Canada, over a two decade period, that it is time to lay the doctrine to rest,1 a close reading of the latest case, Tercon Contractors Ltd. v. British Columbia2 suggests that fundamental breach continues to lurk in the underbrush awaiting an appropriate moment to spring forth in the future. Perhaps Binnie J., in his dissenting opinion, was 2011 CanLIIDocs 94 more realistic than he thought when he framed the removal of fundamental breach as an attempt “to shut the coffin on the jargon”3 associated with fundamental breach rather than of expressly overruling the doctrine. Arguably the spirit of fundamental breach continues to survive in the law of contract, doing the work it has always done of defeating exclusion clauses found by a court too offensive to enforce. But once it is appreciated that fundamental breach was always simply a synonym for unfair contract, the failure of the top court to eradicate it root and branch from contract law is understandable, especially in light of the test which the unanimous Court adopted for controlling the abusive use of exclusion clauses in standard form contracts. This test features other contract law synonyms for unfair contracts such as “unconscionable,” “unequal bargaining power,” and “against public policy.” Whether or not the three-step test of construction, unconscionability review at formation and public policy review at enforcement – to which the Court agreed unanimously – is the most efficient resolution is the subject of this comment.
    [Show full text]
  • CISG Advisory Council* Opinion No. 17 Limitation and Exclusion Clauses in CISG Contracts
    CISG Advisory Council* Opinion No. 17 Limitation and Exclusion Clauses in CISG Contracts To be cited as: CISG-AC Opinion No. 17, Limitation and Exclusion Clauses in CISG Contracts, Rapporteur: Prof. Lauro Gama Jr., Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Adopted by the CISG-AC following its 21st meeting in Bogotá, Colombia, on 16 October 2015. Reproduction of this opinion is authorized. INGEBORG SCHWENZER, Chair YESIM ATAMER, ERIC BERGSTEN, M. JOACHIM BONELL, MICHAEL BRIDGE, ALEJANDRO GARRO, ROY GOODE, JOHN GOTANDA, HAN SHIYUAN, SERGEI LEBEDEV, PILAR PERALES VISCASILLAS, JAN RAMBERG, HIROO SONO, ULRICH SCHROETER, CLAUDE WITZ, Members SIEG EISELEN, Secretary * The CISG-AC started as a private initiative supported by the Institute of International Commercial Law at Pace University School of Law and the Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary, University of London. The International Sales Convention Advisory Council (CISG-AC) is in place to support understanding of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) and the promotion and assistance in the uniform interpretation of the CISG. At its formative meeting in Paris in June 2001, Prof. Peter Schlechtriem of Freiburg University, Germany, was elected Chair of the CISG-AC for a three-year term. Dr. Loukas A. Mistelis of the Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary, University of London, was elected Secretary. The founding members of the CISG-AC were Prof. Emeritus Eric E. Bergsten, Pace University School of Law; Prof. Michael Joachim Bonell, University of Rome La Sapienza; Prof. E. Allan Farnsworth, Columbia University School of Law; Prof. Alejandro M.
    [Show full text]
  • Distinction Between Exception Clause and Exemption Clause
    Special Issue INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMANITIES AND March 2016 CULTURAL STUDIES ISSN 2356-5926 Distinction between exception clause and exemption clause Adel Abbasi Ph.D. Private Law, Mofid university, and Deputy of prosecuting attorney, General and Enghelab public prosecutor`s office, Nazar Abad, Karaj, Iran. E-mail: [email protected]. Phone number: 009809123779306 Office: 0002645383762 Hamid Bazrpach PhD student Private Law, scientific board member Azad Islamic University Hashtgerd. E-mail: [email protected]. Phone number: 009809127678751 Abstract Obligation as a result of legal relation is undertaking of performance by obligor in favor of oblige, and responsibility results from breach and failure to fulfill the former valid obligation. The obligation is eliminated in exception clause and the obligor is not bound, but in exemption clause, just the responsibility which results from the breach and failure to fulfill the obligation is discharged while the obligation itself remains and the obligor is bound. These clauses are sorts of stipulation and obey its regulations. Exemption clause can be seen in the form of condition of performance or corollary condition, but exception clause is generally used in the form of condition of description which describes quality or quantity of obligation(s) arising from contract. The exemption clause and exception clause may have different forms. Keywords: obligation, responsibility, clause, exemption clause, exclusion clause. http://www.ijhcs.com/index.php/ijhcs/index Page 1903 Special Issue INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMANITIES AND March 2016 CULTURAL STUDIES ISSN 2356-5926 Introduction One of the important parts of the civil law which is closely related to the lives of individuals is the law of contracts and obligations.
    [Show full text]
  • An International Comparison of Liability, Indemnities And
    TRG law law simplified INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON - LIABILITY, INDEMNITIES & LIQUIDATED DAMAGES Spring 2014 TRG law www.TRGlaw.com © TRG Law Limited 2014 TRG law law simplified Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 3 England and Wales ...................................................................................................................... 3 Australia .................................................................................................................................... 4 Belgium ..................................................................................................................................... 6 China ......................................................................................................................................... 8 Ecuador ................................................................................................................................... 10 France ..................................................................................................................................... 11 Germany .................................................................................................................................. 13 Ireland ..................................................................................................................................... 15 Italy .......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]