A clause providing for an indemnity against any claim arising from the manner of performance was not to be construed to cover negligence. ‘The printed conditions in the agreement in this case were plainly drafted by a lawyer. Why was an express reference to negligence not inserted? Similar questions have been posed on a number of occasions. Why do draftsmen not take note of the impact of a clear and consistent line of judicial decisions? For my part I have no doubt that the draftsman on the Underground to whom such a question was addressed would say ‘one does not want to frighten off one or other of the parties.’ Omissions of express reference to negligence tend to be deliberate.’
Judges:
Steyn LJ
Citations:
Times 30-May-1994, [1994] 1 WLR 1515
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – E E Caledonia Ltd v Orbit Valve Plc QBD 1994
A clause which gave an indemnity against any claim arising from the manner of performance of the contract by one party was not to be construed to exempt negligence: ‘The principle is that in the absence of clear words the parties to a contract are . .
Cited by:
Appealed to – E E Caledonia Ltd v Orbit Valve Plc QBD 1994
A clause which gave an indemnity against any claim arising from the manner of performance of the contract by one party was not to be construed to exempt negligence: ‘The principle is that in the absence of clear words the parties to a contract are . .
Cited – Stent Foundations Ltd v M J Gleeson Group Plc TCC 9-Aug-2000
The defendant company sought to rely upon an exemption clause.
Held: Applying standard rules for contract interpretation, the exemption clause was to be construed against the one proposing it. At best the clause was ambiguous, and the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract
Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.80197
