The Student Room Group

Need ideas for arguments! (Moot)

For my moot case, Ms Edwards is a student of a University. Her music player has been damaged by the university's negligence. However, the University had the exclusion clause of "The University accepts no liability in negligence for property damage suffered by students on University premises.". It was held previously that the contract was unreasonable under the UCTA 1977. Now the University is appealing.

I am struggling to make my skeleton arguments ><, So far I can only think of saying that the language of the exclusion clause is not specific enough and it only covers negligence damages which the University is not responsible for.
Hi there,

While you're waiting for an answer, did you know we have 300,000 study resources that could answer your question in TSR's Learn together section?

We have everything from Teacher Marked Essays to Mindmaps and Quizzes to help you with your work. Take a look around.

If you're stuck on how to get started, try creating some resources. It's free to do and can help breakdown tough topics into manageable chunks. Get creating now.

Thanks!

Not sure what all of this is about? Head here to find out more.
Reply 2
Original post by Jacklicy
For my moot case, Ms Edwards is a student of a University. Her music player has been damaged by the university's negligence. However, the University had the exclusion clause of "The University accepts no liability in negligence for property damage suffered by students on University premises.". It was held previously that the contract was unreasonable under the UCTA 1977. Now the University is appealing.

I am struggling to make my skeleton arguments ><, So far I can only think of saying that the language of the exclusion clause is not specific enough and it only covers negligence damages which the University is not responsible for.


Hey this is random, and I know you have posted it 1 year ago but I have exactly the same problem for my moot which is only in a few days and was wondering if you can give me any pointers. I am stuck:frown:
I am supposed to be the junior respondent
Reply 3
You could submit that the application of UCTA is invalid in this context because it overly applies in a business situation. As I can understand, this exculion clause shouldn't be dealt with UCTA but through some other means. If I'm correct then your grounds may concern the invalidity of its application. Or am I missing something?
Reply 4
Original post by shehz6
You could submit that the application of UCTA is invalid in this context because it overly applies in a business situation. As I can understand, this exculion clause shouldn't be dealt with UCTA but through some other means. If I'm correct then your grounds may concern the invalidity of its application. Or am I missing something?


I don't think so as in the problem question states that the judge accepts that the term is unreasonable under UCTA thus he agrees that the UCTA is applicable.
I am the junior respondent and I need to find arguments to agree with the judge finding.
Reply 5
In that case, your ground should cover the applicability of UCTA. The submission should concern unreasonableness of the term. This is all I can think of atm. Are you given the points in which the claimant won the previous appealing?

Quick Reply