Lloyd & Anor v Browning & Anor

Lloyd & Anor v Browning & Anor

The exclusion clause was fair and reasonable in this particular contract because both parties had legal advice, the clause was a special condition in common use, and the claimants had the opportunity to secure written confirmation of any oral representations. The judge was justified in dismissing the claim on this basis.

Parties
Claimant: Bryan Lloyd; Claimant: Jacqueline Lloyd; Defendant: William Browning; Defendant: Maureen Browning
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Exclusion Clauses, Unfair Contract Terms, Sale of Land
Contract Law Property Law Misrepresentation Exclusion Clauses Unfair Contract Terms Sale of Land

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bryan Lloyd

Claimant

Jacqueline Lloyd

Claimant

William Browning

Defendant

Maureen Browning

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the exclusion clause in the contract was fair and reasonable under section 11 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977
  2. 2 Whether the misrepresentations induced the claimants to enter into the contract

Ratio Decidendi

The exclusion clause was fair and reasonable in this particular contract because both parties had legal advice, the clause was a special condition in common use, and the claimants had the opportunity to secure written confirmation of any oral representations. The judge was justified in dismissing the claim on this basis.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed