Entire Agreement Clause In English Contract Law

by on September 18, 2021

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial decision and confirmed that the non-allocation clause was an exclusion clause in Division 3. The court`s approach was very simple: would the owner have assumed any responsibility for misrepresented representations, if not for the clause, under the Misrepresentation Act? The answer was yes. At first glance, therefore, the clause was such that it excluded liability and there was no evidence to suggest otherwise. The fact that the clause had contractual effect (which prevents the tenant from claiming that insurance had been given because the tenant had agreed that nothing had been said by the lessor should be considered a representation) made no difference. Section 3 remained in force. The adequacy assessment was therefore applied.

(Visited 1 times, 1 visits today)

Leave A Reply With Facebook


Aliso Viejo Home Search Aliso Viejo Home Values

Post by

has written 289 articles.

You may enjoy these related posts:

    None Found

Leave A Reply With Facebook


Powered by Facebook Comments

Previous post:

Next post: