Quick Contract Question Watch

Danman0704
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 9 years ago
#1
Hi

Could anybody please explain to me in simple terms what The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regukations 1999 provide???
I just don't seem to be able to get my head round it though it could just be the text book that I am reading.

Thanks!
0
reply
anson2004
Badges: 0
#2
Report 9 years ago
#2
UCTA

-- s1 section 2-7 apply to business ( definition of business is not the same as that of SOGA 1979's definition , but check R&B case , regular occurring incidental transaction).

--s2 (1) death or personal injury cannot be excluded by EC due to negligence
-- s2(2) other loss or damage , EC must satisfy the requirement of reasonableness.


-- s3 : apply to “standard terms in business” or “one party deals as customer”
-- one cannot claim to (1) make the contract diff from original (2) make no performance, except it satisfy reasonableness

if ( one deals as customer OR one deals on the 'written standard terms of business' )
{
no EC allowed to render a contract substaintially diff from original or to render no performance at all.
}

Ss6 and ss7
if ( supply of goods and service ) // applicable to SoGA's situation
{
if ( buyer == consumer )
no EC allowed to exclude quality or description
if ( buyer == business )
EC allowed only satisfy the reasonableness test.
}


* meaning of dealing as customer :
(a) not making the contract in the course of business
AND (b) other party make the contract in the course of busines


So what is reasonableness ?
Source :
UCTA s11
UCTA schedule 2
decided at the time the contract is formed ( Stewart Gill Ltd case )
Schedule 2 deals with implied terms by SOGA
(1)bargaining power (2) inducement received (3) knowledge of existence of term
1.complying with the term (covered by the EC) practicable ( at the time of contract ) ?
(5)is it manufactured , processed or adapted to customers' order.
( Note : Schedule 2 is for reference, applied. Under the discretion of court ).
Stewart Gill Ltd v Horatio Myer
(1)reasonableness is considered at the time of contract , what happen later is irrelevant .








================================ =============================
UTCCR
-- applied to consumer = ' oridinary person without ANY business purpose'
-- reg 5 , EC cannot harm good faith and cause significant imbalance.
In Director General of Fair Trading v First National Bank
significant imbalance : term in significant in the supplier's favour
good faith : 'fair and open dealing, no trap, pitfall, take no advantage of customer's lacking in experience, weak bargaining power.
-- procedural fairness, example
"claim must be made within 3 days of xxx.." is not allowed
copied from my own note


http://webjcli.ncl.ac.uk/1999/issue3/macdonald3.html

explains the diff meaning of
"in the course of bussiness" in SoGA and UCTA
and the
"deals as customers/consumer" in UCTA and UTCCR

please note I cannot gurantee my notes being 100% correct and exhaustive
In fact only I could fully understand my notes , which is written in my style..
It is recommended that you read the statute by yourself
0
reply
jacketpotato
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#3
Report 9 years ago
#3
Try a new textbook, and try just reading the statute...
0
reply
Scarlet rose
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#4
Report 9 years ago
#4
There is quite a good explanation here:

http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/Unfa...by-statute.php
0
reply
The_Goose
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#5
Report 9 years ago
#5
give right to thrid parties who are expressly named in to contract if
(a) the contract gives them the right to sue nder the contract
(b) they stand to benefit from the contract

prvents orignial parties altering the contract to the detriment ofthe third party

apprently overhauls the doctrine of privity, but is only an exception to the general rule and can be excluded where the parties expresssly say so
0
reply
chalks
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#6
Report 9 years ago
#6
(Original post by The_Goose)
give right to thrid parties who are expressly named in to contract if
(a) the contract gives them the right to sue nder the contract
(b) they stand to benefit from the contract

prvents orignial parties altering the contract to the detriment ofthe third party

apprently overhauls the doctrine of privity, but is only an exception to the general rule and can be excluded where the parties expresssly say so
I think you're probably referring to Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, not UCTA or the UCTRR?
0
reply
The_Goose
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#7
Report 9 years ago
#7
(Original post by chalks)
I think you're probably referring to Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, not UCTA or the UCTRR?
yep =) my brain had melted
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

University open days

  • Cranfield University
    Cranfield Forensic MSc Programme Open Day Postgraduate
    Thu, 25 Apr '19
  • University of the Arts London
    Open day: MA Footwear and MA Fashion Artefact Postgraduate
    Thu, 25 Apr '19
  • Cardiff Metropolitan University
    Undergraduate Open Day - Llandaff Campus Undergraduate
    Sat, 27 Apr '19

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (446)
37.93%
No - but I will (88)
7.48%
No - I don't want to (80)
6.8%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (562)
47.79%

Watched Threads

View All