Rules/ Terms of Contract 0.0 / 5 ? LawContract lawA2/A-levelOCR Created by: em.101Created on: 09-08-17 15:59 Oscar chess v williams (expertise) expert sells to non expert= more likely to form part of contract 1 of 11 **** Bentley v Harold Smith Motors (expertise) parties on equal footing not liable for statements made as both are knowledgeable 2 of 11 Interfoto v Stiletto harsh terms should stand out: bold, underline, red or wont form part of contract 3 of 11 routledge v mackay (too early) 4 of 11 olley v marlborough court (too early) hotel: back of door 5 of 11 Schawel v Read (horse case) untruthful statements means party can sue 6 of 11 Ecay v Godfrey (boat) previous statement meant that 'sound' claim was not part of contract 7 of 11 chapelton v barry deck chair receipt too late so exemption clause was not valid 8 of 11 Parker v SE Railway //// Sugar v LMS Railway receipt was contractual document 9 of 11 Hollier v rambler motors (prev dealings) garage burnt with car inside, claimant did not know about exclusion term 10 of 11 McCutcheon v David McBrayne (prev dealings) claimant behaviour too inconsistent to form course of dealing so not a term of contract 11 of 11
Comments
No comments have yet been made