Adler v Dickson  - Urgent Help please!!Watch
I know one reason is because the clause only stipulated to exempt the company themselves from liability and not their servants or agents.
Can someone give me another reason?
Would another reason be because the defendants cannot rely on the exclusion clause due to the doctrine of privity (stating generally that only parties to the contract can receive benefits from the contract)? The defendant weren't party to the contract and so cannot rely. But is this the same as the first reason I stated above?
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.
Not sure what all of this is about? Head here to find out more.