Terms of exclusion or limitation of contractual liability under English civil law

Author:

Hasneziri Luan1

Affiliation:

1. Albanian University , Tirana , Albania

Abstract

Abstract English contract law pays great attention to the terms of exclusion or limitation of contractual liability that the parties may provide in a contract. This is due to the fact that these terms can be considered as a social problem, since they are a means by which the contracting parties seek to avoid liability for non-fulfillment of contractual obligations. In this sense, these terms constitute an easy way for the contracting party, which is stronger, to exclude itself from liability to the other party. This is especially true in consumer related contracts. The purpose of this paper is to address how these terms are regulated by doctrine and jurisprudence in England. This paper consists of two main cases. In the first case, the content and features of the terms of exclusion or limitation of contractual liability will be analyzed according to common law or judicial practice in England. It is understood that in this case, at the center of attention will be the analysis of the decisions of courts of different levels or the analysis of judicial precedents, since it is the latter that gives the meaning and content of these terms. In the second case, the terms of exclusion or limitation of contractual liability will be analyzed in general, according to the English law: “The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977”. Here we will specifically analyze the reasons that drove the legislators in England to pass this law, as well as address some of the main provisions of this law, as well as the impact they have had on judicial practice. Also, special attention will be paid to the cases of English judicial practice in relation to the correct and exact meaning of the concrete provisions of this law.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Reference12 articles.

1. Beale, H, “Chitty on Contracts”, 33rd Edition, Sweet & Maxwell 2018.

2. Decision of the London Court of Appeal of 2001, in the case of British Fermentation Products Ltd v Compair Reavel Ltd.

3. Decision of the House of Lords of 1952 in the case of Canada Steamship Lines v United Kingdom.

4. Decision of the House of Lords of 2003 in the case of HIH Casualty and General Insurance Ltd v Chase Manhattan Bank.

5. Decision of the London Court of Appeal of 2014 in the case of Greenwich Millennium Village Ltd v. Essex Services Group plc.

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Problems on legal qualification of criminal offense during precautionary measures;Academic Journal of Business, Administration, Law and Social Sciences;2024-07-01

2. Reflection on the entrepreneurship contract in the current market conditions in Albania;European Journal of Economics, Law and Social Sciences;2024-06-01

3. Limitation of the right to appeal against the decision to take the case to court;European Journal of Economics, Law and Social Sciences;2024-06-01

4. A Comparative Analysis of Donation Contract in Albanian and Italian Contract Law;European Journal of Economics, Law and Social Sciences;2024-06-01

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3