The appellant had contracted to provide office accomodation to the defendant. The air conditioning did not work and there were other defects. The appellant now challenged a finding of liability and that its contract terms which were said to totally exclude liability were unfair under the 1977 Act.
Held: The appeal succeeded. Alternative remedies would have been available to the tenant, including mitigation of losses. Though the contract might exclude liabiity for certain acts of the appellant: ‘Liability for fraud or malice, or recklessness which is a species of either, goes without saying: parties contract with one another in the expectation of honest dealing. It is simply that in imposing conditions for the accepting of any liability, Regus did not, by referring to the need for negligence, wish to suggest that an intentional breach of contract could not similarly be made the basis of liability. ‘
The purchaser had been advised to nsure, and would be in a far better position to insure than the seller. The clause was reasonable.
Judges:
Rix LJ
Citations:
[2008] EWCA Civ 361
Links:
Statutes:
Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Hewitt v Rowlands CA 1924
The landlord had failed to repair the property as required by his covenant.
Held: The primary measure of loss for a breach of a contract to provide such services is the diminution in value of the services promised. . .
Cited – Electricity Supply Nominees Limited v The National Magazine Company Limited; The National Magazine Company Limited v Electricity Supply Nominees Limited, Matthew Hall Limited, Otis Plc, Dtz Debenham TCC 12-Aug-1998
Apportionment of service charges. . .
Cited – Earle v Charalambous CA 28-Jul-2006
Calculation of damages for breach of covenant to repair by landlord. . .
Cited – McCoy and Co v Clark CA 1984
. .
Cited – English Churches Housing Group v Shine CA 7-Apr-2004
The claimant was a secure tenant of English Churches Housing Group. He was unemployed and lived on benefits. He claimed damages against his landlord for breaches of the repairing covenants implied by section 11. The court considerd the appropriate . .
Cited – Wallace and others v Manchester City Council CA 23-Jul-1998
Damages payable to a tenant for a landlord’s failure to repair whilst the tenant remained in the property were not separate damages for discomfort and diminution in rental value since these amounted to the same thing: ‘for periods when the tenant . .
Cited – C Chiodi v De Marney CA 1988
The claimant was a statutory tenant occupying a flat at a registered fair rent of andpound;8 per week. He withheld the rent and was sued for possession. He counterclaimed for damages for breach of the implied covenant on the part of the landlord to . .
Cited – HIH Casualty And General Insurance Limited and Others v The Chase Manhattan Bank and Others CA 31-Jul-2001
Parties syndicating finance for a film obtained the security of an insurance which is designed to pay up to the sum insured, if the revenues generated by the film were insufficient to repay the loan finance plus associated expenses. The polices were . .
Cited – HIH Casualty and General Insurance Limited and others v Chase Manhattan Bank and others HL 20-Feb-2003
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 . .
Cited – Davis Turner and Co Ltd v Granville Oil and Chemicals Ltd CA 15-Apr-2003
The time bar provision, now found in cl. 28(B) of BIFA, satisfied the requirements of reasonableness under UCTA. . .
Cited – George Mitchell (Chesterhall) Ltd v Finney Lock Seeds Ltd CA 29-Sep-1982
The buyer bought 30lbs of cabbage seed, but the seed was not correct, and the crop was worthless. The seed cost pounds 192, but the farmer lost pounds 61,000. The seed supplier appealed the award of the larger amount and interest, saying that their . .
Cited – Skipsredittforeningen v Emperor Navigation SA 1997
The court considered the reaonableness of a contract clause which sought to exclude liability for misrepresentation: ‘The consequence of the approach adopted in Stewart Gill [[1992] 1 QB 600] is (as the present case shows) that the court may hear . .
Cited – George Mitchell (Chesterhall) Ltd v Finney Lock Seeds Ltd HL 1983
A seedsman sought to rely upon an exclusion clause preventing any claim by a purchaser by way of set off against its sales invoices. The House was asked whether a contractual term was ‘fair and reasonable’ within the meaning of section 55 of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract
Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.266800