Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 08 JUNE 2007

Excluding Liability: What Are The Limits?

Fenwick Elliott LLP
Fenwick Elliott LLP
Contributor
Fenwick Elliott LLP

Fenwick Elliott LLP

Fenwick Elliott provides a comprehensive range of legal services on every aspect of the...

View firm profile
Explore more from Fenwick Elliott LLP

It is frequently the case that companies try and exclude as much liability as possible in their standard terms and conditions. The recent case of Regus (UK) Ltd v Epcot Solutions Ltd [2007] EWHC 938, which came before HHJ Mackie QC, demonstrates that there are clear limits on what can and cannot be so excluded.

United KingdomReal Estate and Construction

It is frequently the case that companies try and exclude as much liability as possible in their standard terms and conditions. The recent case of Regus (UK) Ltd v Epcot Solutions Ltd [2007] EWHC 938, which came before HHJ Mackie QC, demonstrates that there are clear limits on what can and cannot be so excluded.

Facts

Regus (UK) Limited ("Regus") supply serviced office accommodation. Epcot Solutions Ltd ("Epcot") provide professional IT training. Epcot entered into an agreement with Regus on Regus’ usual terms and conditions for the use of serviced office accommodation for Epcot’s training courses. Epcot initially rented office accommodation in Heathrow. After Regus closed this location, Epcot were offered, and accepted, alternative accommodation at Stockley Park. Epcot moved to Stockley Park and entered into a new agreement with Regus on the same terms and conditions.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from