翻訳と辞書
Words near each other
・ SmithAmundsen
・ Smithatris
・ Smithboro, Illinois
・ Smithborough
・ Smithborough railway station
・ Smithbrook
・ Smith Township, Belmont County, Ohio
・ Smith Township, Greene County, Indiana
・ Smith Township, Indiana
・ Smith Township, Mahoning County, Ohio
・ Smith Township, Ohio
・ Smith Township, Posey County, Indiana
・ Smith Township, Washington County, Pennsylvania
・ Smith Township, Whitley County, Indiana
・ Smith v Croft (No 2)
Smith v Eric S Bush
・ Smith v Gardner Merchant
・ Smith v Glasgow City District Council
・ Smith v Hughes
・ Smith v Knights of Columbus
・ Smith v Land and House Property Corp
・ Smith v Leech Brain & Co Ltd
・ Smith v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd
・ Smith v Parsons
・ Smith v Smith
・ Smith v. Allwright
・ Smith v. Board of School Commissioners of Mobile County
・ Smith v. Bolles
・ Smith v. California
・ Smith v. Commissioner


Dictionary Lists
翻訳と辞書 辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ]
スポンサード リンク

Smith v Eric S Bush : ウィキペディア英語版
Smith v Eric S Bush

''Smith v Eric S Bush'' () (UKHL 1 ) is an English tort law and contract law case, heard by the House of Lords. First, it concerned the existence of a duty of care in tort for negligent misstatements, not made directly to someone relying on the statement. Second, it concerned the reasonableness of a term excluding liability under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, s 2(2) and s 11.
==Facts==
A surveyor, Eric Bush, was employed by a building society, Abbey National, to inspect and value 242 Silver Road, Norwich.〔By section 25 of the Building Societies Act 1962, now section 13 of the Building Societies Act 1986, the Abbey National was bound to obtain 'a written report prepared and signed by a competent and prudent person who is experienced in the matters relevant to the determination of the value' of the house.〕 Eric Bush disclaimed responsibility to the purchaser, Mrs Smith, who was paying a fee of £36.89 to the building society to have the valuation done. The building society had a similar clause in its mortgage agreement. The property valuation said no essential repairs were needed. This was wrong. But Mrs Smith relied on this and bought the house. Bricks from the chimney collapsed through the roof, smashing through the loft. Mrs Smith argued there was a duty of care in tort to exercise care in making statements and then that the clause excluding liability for loss or damage to property was unreasonable under 2(2) and 13(1) of UCTA 1977. The value of the property at the time was around £88,000.
The case was joined with another appeal, ''Harris v Wyre Forest District Council''. In this one, it was the Council that was the mortgagee. It also did the valuation. It also had a disclaimer, which was challenged by the home buyer.
For Mr and Mrs Harris Anthony Colman QC (now Colman J), Malcolm Stitcher and David Platt appeared, and for Wyre Forest District Council and Mr Lee appeared Piers Ashworth QC and Nicholas J Worsley. Mrs Smith was represented by Robert Seabrook Q.C. and Philip Havers, while Eric S. Bush was represented by Nigel Hague QC and Jane Davies.

抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)
ウィキペディアで「Smith v Eric S Bush」の詳細全文を読む



スポンサード リンク
翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース

Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.