Business Law: Exclusion Clause and Unconscionable Conduct

Business Law

Part A
In the first case, Jones parked her car in the
automatic car parking of Smith’s Parking.
A notice outside the parking provided that
the owners should park their car at their own
risk.
Jones received a ticket at the machine in
which it was stated in small print that it is
subject to certain terms and conditions
written inside the parking.

Part A
Jones was injured when she come back to
received her car and she sued the company.
The company provided that the terms written
inside the car parking provides that it cannot
be held liable for injuries suffered by
customers.
The issue which is raised in the first part is
whether it is likely that the car parking
company will succeed in avoiding its liability
based on exclusion clause.

Part A
Parties who wanted to rely on an exclusion
clause have to comply with its general rule.
The rule provides that the clause must be
brought into the attention of the party before
the contract is formed and while it is being
formed (Gibson, 2017).
In the judgement of Olley v Marlborough
Court [1949] 1 KB 532 it was held that
appropriate measures must be taken to bring
the clause into the attention of the contractual
parties.