Bargaining power

law pnotwlslmerpwg
clause in relationship to lawof negligence
Exemption
 puts g 9 81 1 9
torfbugamg
pmu party
Hallow exemption
clause othermeans t
Section 7 cannotuseexemption family no
claim unfair
(1) A person cannot by reference to any contract term or to a notice
given to persons generally or to particular persons exclude or restrict
his liability for death or personal injury resulting from negligence.

c
(2) In the case of other loss or damage, a person cannot so exclude or
restrict his liability for negligence except in so far as the term or

䨇㵘
notice satisfies the requirement of reasonableness. Dfairness
(3) Where a contract term or notice purports to exclude2 bargaining
power
or restrict
liability for negligence a person’s agreement to or awareness of it is ofterm

D
not of itself to be taken as indicating his voluntary acceptance of any
risk.
claim
Mtumchdes give upright to
exemptionclause ssign Xwhntmri.IEpussirelysaylmite
 9
mk
hluahmabkness
etpngunu 2tulgaeplthhi
unless

Adertnmat Bank
agency
rsmeonecanrelgthentgd
mtreeadnzetmanuālposih
Fact:
Disclaimerclause effatnelxtestreasonab
The plaintiff applied for mortgage and the building society instructed surveyors to
inspect the house. Gǔentestuasmabkne
In the survey report it was stated that no essential repair was necessary. bdmmadausecan
The plaintiff relied on the report and purchased the house.
sailmethane
The plaintiff later found that there was a structural defect.
bpowrofdrerlnmg
The plaintiff sued the surveyor for negligence.
There was a disclaimer clause in the report.
companyBank
Issue:
Whether the disclaimer clause was reasonable under Section 2(2) of the Unfair Contract
Terms Act 1977?
nssnothasm reasonableness
menonhgugm Test
3 knowledge
 sumyorsp Dtmrness g g g
mmtrutbetngnssnnsuruycr surveyors_unhwurablesnruyors
no othermeanstoclaim position
plaintiff

Section 21(1)
Where any person suffers damage as the result partly of his
own fault and partly of the fault of any other person or
persons, a claim in respect of that damage shall not be
defeated by reason of the fault of the person suffering the
damage, but the damages recoverable in respect thereof
shall be reduced to such extent as the court thinks just and
equitable having regard to the claimant’s share in the
responsibility for the damage:
ifnjuudpmgantrihnas the 似
Contribution negligence compensationb20
leg测
to escapetmnhahhg
 y
aueptameohnkirelymthn to escape hihg
Voluntary as long as yo
canprove

Fact:
The defendant was learning driving from a friend.
The friend asked about the insurance and the defendant said there was full insurance coverage for
the friend.
The defendant acted like a good learner for the first two lessons.
During the third lesson, the defendant panicked and caused an accident.
The friend suffered from injury and sued the defendant.
The defendant argued that she tried her best as a learner and the friend had impliedly consented
to run the risk so the defendant was not liable.
voluntarilyaccept theink

f
Defedendantiplantitfwluntangaugynif
Issue:
Whether there was any implied consent to run the risk in this case?
ifgireuptheright toclaim
What was the standard duty of care that was owed by the defendant?
nhyaskmsnranu

nomatterhhouau onedug on the_Reasonable diner duty

 road
Contributory negligence

Fact:
There was a driving accident that was caused by a car with two passengers.
The passengers were husband and wife.
They sued the driver for compensation.
Dnnadmitedthathewashable
There was no issue about the liability of the driver.
The wife was pregnant and she didn’t wear a seat belt during the accident.
contributory negligence
if wifecontributed 在 划
Issue:
Was there an issue of contributory negligence in this case?
gary
whethernearinga seatbeltwilldo moreharmless harm
 IN by negligence
an
lnhetheraltnhnauhmmllcanheaddihmalharm
yes.cn

Fact:
There was a letter of credit issued by a bank.
One condition stated that “Shipment must be effected not later than 25 October 1993”.
The loading was delayed so the condition was not met. The shipping agent and ship
owner issued a bills of lading with a wrong date to meet the condition.
SCB (as the confirming bank) authorised the payment under the letter of credit, then
sought reimbursement from the issuing bank. The issuing bank rejected the
reimbursement.
SCB sued the shipping agent and shipowner for damages. Billof landing

Issue: Buyer seller

Was there a contributory negligence in this case?
anhrmngbankhashtytochukanyffgflfPay
I del lchakhnnig
nrmgut lsatn an.ms
gGig
Banklnfchakdcl
satng
In Donoghue v Stevenson, it was held that a duty of care is established with three
elements.What are the three elements?

different harm pemmalnjungleunomichssl

What are the different types of negligence that you have learned so far? damag
property
wun
What are the questions you have to ask for negligent misstatement? personalinjurywith
occupancy
hnhhg
 Eggshell
“The wrongdoer must take the victim as he/she finds him/her.” What is the name of this
rule?
Employerhasto behnhle 在 her
death
injury
What kind of negligence cannot be exempted under the Control of Exemption Clause
Ordinance?
personal injury death
What are the two defences to negligence?
Amy worked for a fish mince processing plant. The plant was operated by Nice Fish
Company Limited (‘NF’). Amy’s job duties included grinding fish meats and packing fish
mince. While the grinding was mostly conducted by the machines, Amy needed to scrape
some bone-in fish meats with a knife manually. One day, when Amy was grinding the
bone-in fish meats with a knife, she accidentally cut her finger. The wound was deep, and
Amy could not stop the bleeding. Amy’s colleague, Susan, called an ambulance and Amy
was sent to the hospital. Unfortunately, Amy passed away due to severe blood loss.
Amy’s case was investigated and some facts were revealed. First, Amy suffered from a
heart condition, and even a minor wound would lead to severe blood loss. Second. When
the accident happened, Susan tried to look for a first aid kit but couldn’t find one in the
plant. Third, Amy did not reveal her heart condition to NF as she worried she would lose
her job by telling the truth. Forth, the machines could also grind bone-in fish meats, but
Amy was not informed. NF did not provide any training to Amy for the operation of the
machines.
Discuss whether NF is liable for negligence.

Employerduty ofcaupmidehntaid
 .pmth org
Issue 1
Whether NF is liable for negligence
Any other issue? Kane
ia_limgdnnhne4highphttnm
Relevant law for issue 1
For is the case law/legislation that is relevant to the issue? You need to explain which
case law is the most appropriate to the current issue.
Analysis tmphyudihithchse
How is the case law/legislation applicable to the current situation? contributory
Conclusion
negligence
Whether NF is liable or not? What is the remedy?

Chum Damage
 ǏM is liable to Negligence

器囖譽
Casefalling hnnfnmhighplathm

㸑
BximigEmployer employee
inability 29xpmidetrstaidltrainmg Amysuh

a.es care toAmy

are dig
a of
xpnuide Buam.hr du
plyi
case_threeelements
100 match

hábk damage
Result
Negligence
Issued Contributory
The law antnbntyhehgenu
conditions contributeto her
loss
Anix reveal heart
Case match
 the
Resnl_t.pedue
amount ofcompensation