I am preparing for a moot, and my point as the junior appellant is that; 'barclays bank did not exclude liability by way of the exemption clause'
So i am appealing that it did apply
the exemption clause is - "the trustee shall not be liable for any loss or damage whatsoever that may occur with respect to the portfolio investments hereby settled unless such loss or damage should be caused by the trustees own fraud"
and in the case Barclays had not acted dishonestly, and thats not the point im debating anyways.
It seems to straightforward, apply Amitage v Nurse. And I know that the Unfair Contract Terms Act Doesn't apply.
So do I just back it up with supporting cases?
And what would the respondent even argue?
...Should I go back to school?