Contract clause

[Alan]

The vast majority of contracts have a clause similar to
"Nothing in this Agreement shall exclude or limit liability for death or personal injury resulting from the negligence of either party or their servants, agents or employees"

What is the implication of removing this clause?

 

[Free Lance]

The reason for this is because elsewhere in the contract is a clause which limits or excludes liability - even if it is just the "entire agreement clause" which excludes and pre-contract representations/other agreements from the scope of the agreement.

The reason why the clause you highlight is in there is to protect the exclusion/limitation of liability clause. The logic which the court applies is, using the example of personal injury:

1. There are some liabilities which cannot be excluded by law. Personal injury is one.
2. If you have an exclusion clause which tries to exclude all liability then that will not work because it is not possible to exclude liability for personal injury.
3. Because the clause wrongly attempts to exclude liability for personal injury it is invalid.
4. Because the clause is invalid it is invalid for all purposes. So because the clause accidentally excluded personal injury all the clause is invalid.
5. If you include the clause you highlight then that carves out the matters which cannot be excluded by law from the scope of the limitation of liability clause. The limitation of liability clause will not be invalid because it is not then trying to exclude a liability that it cannot exclude.

Easy!

 

[Alan]

OK I get it, Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 section 2

 

[smallclaimsassistance]

The reason for this is because elsewhere in the contract is a clause which limits or excludes liability - even if it is just the "entire agreement clause" which excludes and pre-contract representations/other agreements from the scope of the agreement.

The reason why the clause you highlight is in there is to protect the exclusion/limitation of liability clause. The logic which the court applies is, using the example of personal injury:

1. There are some liabilities which cannot be excluded by law. Personal injury is one.
2. If you have an exclusion clause which tries to exclude all liability then that will not work because it is not possible to exclude liability for personal injury.
3. Because the clause wrongly attempts to exclude liability for personal injury it is invalid.
4. Because the clause is invalid it is invalid for all purposes. So because the clause accidentally excluded personal injury all the clause is invalid.
5. If you include the clause you highlight then that carves out the matters which cannot be excluded by law from the scope of the limitation of liability clause. The limitation of liability clause will not be invalid because it is not then trying to exclude a liability that it cannot exclude.

Easy!

Well said!