- News
All the latest updates on building safety reformRegulations latest
- Focus
- Comment
- Programmes
- CPD
- Building the Future
- Jobs
- Data
- Subscribe
- Events
2024 events calendar
Explore nowBuilding Awards
Keep up to date
- Building Boardroom
Terms limiting liability must not only be fair but must also correspond with a service provider’s standard terms of business
Clauses that attempt to exclude or limit liabilities are well established in construction contracts. Every contract should identify particular risks and the party who assumes liability for each one. The pressure to regulate clauses that seek to exclude or limit liabilities ultimately gave rise to the 1977 Unfair Contract Terms Act (UCTA). Section 3 of the act states that a party that is in breach of contract cannot exclude or restrict its liability in respect of the breach except and insofar as the contract term satisfies the requirement of reasonableness. Clauses that seek to exclude or limit liability for personal injury or death are ineffective in every case. However, the act will only apply where one of the parties deals as a consumer or on the other’s written standard terms of business.
Furthermore, despite its somewhat vague title, the act does not extend to strike out any clause that either party would belatedly consider to be unfair. Its application is limited only to clauses that purport to exclude or limit liability. Nobody would want to admit that their written terms of business limiting or excluding its liabilities are unreasonable, but there may be occasions when they may be so judged.
…
Existing subscriber? LOGIN
Stay at the forefront of thought leadership with news and analysis from award-winning journalists. Enjoy company features, CEO interviews, architectural reviews, technical project know-how and the latest innovations.
Get your free guest access SIGN UP TODAY
Subscribe to Building today and you will benefit from:
View our subscription options and join our community