Ads
related to: reasonableness test contract lawlawdepot.com has been visited by 100K+ users in the past month
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Howard Marine and Dredging Co Ltd v A Ogden & Sons (Excavations) Ltd [1978] QB 574 is an English contract law case, concerning misrepresentation.It explains the test of "reasonable grounds for belief" under the Misrepresentation Act 1967 s 2(1), and raises the issue of the reasonableness test under s 3.
However, when a non-consumer contract simply described a party's primary obligation, this was a ‘basis clause’ and there was no question of applying the reasonableness test. Clause 5.8 was not reasonable. The judge rightly stressed that pre-contract inquiries were important in conveyancing. There could be an exceptional case where a clause ...
In law, subjective standard and objective standards are legal standards for knowledge or beliefs of a plaintiff or defendant. [1] [2]: 554–559 [3]An objective standard of reasonableness ascertains the knowledge of a person by viewing a situation from the standpoint of a hypothetical reasonable person, without considering the particular physical and psychological characteristics of the defendant.
The expression has also been incorporated in Canadian patent jurisprudence, notably Beloit v.Valmet Oy [9] in its discussion of the test for obviousness. [10]In Australia, the "Clapham omnibus" expression has inspired the New South Wales and Victorian equivalents, "the man on the Bondi tram" (a now disused tram route in Sydney), [11] "the man on the Bourke Street tram" (), [12] and "the ...
Case law. Stewart Gill Ltd v Horatio Myer & Co Ltd. [5] provides that reasonableness is assessed at the time of contract; and that the burden of proof is upon the party purporting to have excluded liability. Levison v Patent Steam Carpet Cleaning Co Ltd. [6] provides that clarity and preciseness will raise the reasonableness of a term; and vice ...
The test of whether a document fits within the description of a ticket is an objective test, that is, whether a reasonable person in the position of the ticket-holder would perceive it to be contractual in nature. For instance, if exclusion clauses accompany a docket, it may be held that it is not contractual in nature since it is just a receipt.