Pornthip clause. In this case clause is exemption clause

Pornthip Sangwonrudee 101798Part 2.Answer A.Law: Exclusion clause The court will look to exclusion clauses to considering very carefully because people are often not much to read the fine print on the document  that they have to receive or sign. The effective of exclusion clause is very important of construction  of contract, likely taking to bargaining of the parties.  Thu case of commercial in contract, court will prepared the parties to an equal bargaining of position to seek legal assistance ,unless in the case of a consumer contract, the parties might have been in unequal bargaining positions and the consumer might not have even had time to read the document.  Application: Type of clause on docket that Jane has signed is exclusion clause. In this case clause is exemption clause which incorporate contract Laundry Today Pty Ltd. Should had the liability to Jane for damages of colour and fade on the dress.Reference: Gibson, Andy. Business Law eBook, 9th Edition.P.Ed Australia, 20150901. VitalBook file. Page 367                                   ……………………………………………………..Answer b.Law: Signing a document.if the document has found to be in part of the contract, much then depends on whether or not party was signed by the acceptor. A party signing a document should knowing and read all of the term and condition that it contains contractual terms is generally bound by those terms and condition, whether they have read it or not. case L’Estrange V Graucob Ltd 1934Application: Jane had singed the docket. This means Jane had bound in contract between her and the Dry cleaner shop .Jane had singed docket without reading in condition and want to argue later, it is legal effectiveness. The court will held thatno fraud or misrepresentation she has aware from the dry cleaner about noticed.Reference: Gibson, Andy. Business Law eBook, 9th Edition.P.Ed Australia, 20150901. VitalBook file. Page 368                                    ……………………………………………………..    Answer c.Law: singed documents, Evidence of fraud or misrepresentationIf fraud or misrepresentation can be established the person singing will not be boundcase: Curtis v Chemical Cleaning & Dyeing Co 1951 1 KB 805Application: The effect of the representative’s reply to Jane the exclusion clause is not effective in this situation, representative had misrepresented about the term to Jane. Company may not have been able to rely on the clause even if Jane had signed the receipt without asking any questions, because it was represented to her by the shop assistant as being a receipt. The question that would then have arisen would have been whether it was then a document in which a person would have expected to find contractual terms. Reference: Gibson, Andy. Business Law eBook, 9th Edition.P.Ed Australia, 20150901. VitalBook file.page 369                                    ……………………………………………………..Answer DLaw: contra proferentum rule  The contra proferentum rule against the party who inserted the contract , The clause will be ‘read down’ by the court unless it specifies the type of liability to be covered and any ambiguity will be resolved in favour of the injured party. The clear word need to be use exempt limit in liability for negligence.Case: White v John Warwick & Co Ltd 1953 1 WLR 1285Application: No, The that shop reply wording is unclear contract, the action of the dry cleaner clause is not including for the liability of damages in colour of fading because dress can be easily to be damage. Also Jane owed duty in contract with company but exemption clause can be applied to protect to owners from their ability , not from common law negligence  duty of care in any ambiguities will strict and against party relying on the clause.Reference: Gibson, Andy. Business Law eBook, 9th Edition.P.Ed Australia, 20150901. VitalBook file. page 374                                    ……………………………………………………..Answer FLaw: she can sue for misrepresentation refer as answer in C Case: Curtis v Chemical Cleaning & Dyeing Co 1951 1 KB 805Application: We can use misrepresentation to sue for damage to her dress , because Jane has asked about question to the dry cleaner before she  has signed and it was presented to Jane that  Drycleaner was being a receipt. On question could then have expected in contract term.Reference: Business Law eBook, 9th Edition. P.Ed Australia, 20150901. VitalBook file.page 374                                   ……………………………………………………..G. Would your answer for (e) be different if Jane was not required to sign the docket?Law : Where document is unsigned, two mains has to be consider          1.Resonable Notice test ,This test is reasonably sufficient of clause given, reasonable ,not actual notice .case: Olley v Marlborough court 19491 KB 532.         2.Contractual Document , If the court has found that the clause not enough  as general rules  party will be bound in terms of contract if they have knowledge. Case: Chappleton v Barry UDC 1940}Application: 1.Reasonable notice test Answer is No because ,if the shop did not make Jane aware  and Jane did not signed document , Jan’s response is  just collecting her dress and not relate to the document that contain of term and contract blinding for liability and negligence   2. Contractual Document Clause could not pass in Jane’s case because of on exclusion clause in contract law  the docket has been blinding  in case show that  representation made by  one party that mean could not become a term of contract . 

x

Hi!
I'm Joan!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out