Section 2(3) UCTA 1977 states that the fact that a person is aware of an exclusion clause/notice does not in itself mean that they have consented to the risk, (see [ case ]below). Note that this was a case decided before UCTA 1977 came into force. Special care should, therefore, be taken when analysing pre- 1977 cases.
Answer
White v Blackmore [1972] 2 QB 651
Tags
#occupiers-liability #tort
Question
Section 2(3) UCTA 1977 states that the fact that a person is aware of an exclusion clause/notice does not in itself mean that they have consented to the risk, (see [ case ]below). Note that this was a case decided before UCTA 1977 came into force. Special care should, therefore, be taken when analysing pre- 1977 cases.
Answer
?
Tags
#occupiers-liability #tort
Question
Section 2(3) UCTA 1977 states that the fact that a person is aware of an exclusion clause/notice does not in itself mean that they have consented to the risk, (see [ case ]below). Note that this was a case decided before UCTA 1977 came into force. Special care should, therefore, be taken when analysing pre- 1977 cases.
Answer
White v Blackmore [1972] 2 QB 651
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it Section 2(3) UCTA 1977 states that the fact that a person is aware of an exclusion clause/notice does not in itself mean that they have consented to the risk, (see White v Blackmore [1972] 2 QB 651 below). Note that this was a case decided before UCTA 1977 came into force. Special care should, therefore, be taken when analysing pre- 1977 cases.
Original toplevel document (pdf)
cannot see any pdfs
Summary
status
not learned
measured difficulty
37% [default]
last interval [days]
repetition number in this series
0
memorised on
scheduled repetition
scheduled repetition interval
last repetition or drill
Details
No repetitions
Discussion
Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.