References: [1972] 2 QB 71
Coram: Salmon LJ
Ratio: When construing a clause: ‘in the end you are driven back to construing the clause in question to see what it means’
This case cites:
- Restricted – Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v The King PC ([1952] AC 192)
A lease of a freight shed exonerated the lessor from ‘any claim . . for . . damage . . to . . Goods . . being . . in the said shed’ and requiring the lessee to indemnify the lessor ‘from and against all claims’. The negligent use of an oxy-acetylene . .
(This list may be incomplete)
This case is cited by:
- Cited – Stent Foundations Ltd v M J Gleeson Group Plc TCC (Bailii, [2000] EWHC Technology 66)
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 . . - Dicta approved – Smith v South Wales Switchgear HL ([1978] 1 WLR 165)
The principles set out in Canada Steamship apply to ‘clauses which purport to exempt one party to a contract from liability’. The principles should be applied without ‘mechanistic construction’. Lord Keith of Kinkel: The tests were guidelines, but . . - Cited – HIH Casualty and General Insurance Limited and others v Chase Manhattan Bank and others HL (House of Lords, Bailii, [2003] UKHL 6, [2003] 1 All ER Comm 349, [2003] 2 Lloyd’s Law Reports 61, [2004] ICR 1708, [2003] Lloyds Rep IR 230, [2003] 1 CLC 358)
The insurance company had paid claims on policies used to underwrite the production of TV films. The re-insurers resisted the claims against them by the insurers on the grounds of non-disclosure by the insured, or in the alternative damages for . .
(This list may be incomplete)
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Last Update: 17-Nov-16
Ref: 195686