|
''Tunkl. v. Regents of the University of California''〔60 Cal.2d 92, 383 P.2d 441 (1963)〕 () was a leading case in California that established a persuasive six-factor test that helps guide courts to decide when a contract relates to the "public interest." Specifically, California courts had a history of holding exculpatory liability waivers within contracts to be valid only if they did not involve the "public interest." This case history arose in relation to Cal. Civ. Code §1668, a statute that states "All contracts which have for their object, directly or indirectly, to exempt anyone from responsibility for his own fraud, or willful injury to the person or property of another, or violation of law, whether willful or negligent, are against the policy of the law." Cal. Civ. Code § 1668. At the time, it was difficult to gauge exactly what the courts meant by interpreting this statute to apply fervently to contracts "in the public interest." Tunkl helped clarify this, though there is still a debate as to how many of the six factors must be met, or whether certain factors should be read to be subservient to others. According to Tunkl, the six factors that determine, in the instance, whether a contract relates to the public interest are: 1) "The party seeking exculpation is engaged in performing a service of great importance to the public, which is often a matter of practical necessity for some members of the public." 2) "The party holds himself out as willing to perform this service for any member of the public who seeks it, or at least for any member coming within certain established standards." 3) "As a result of the essential nature of the service, in the economic setting of the transaction, the party invoking exculpation possesses a decisive advantage of bargaining strength against any member of the public who seeks his services." 4) "In exercising a superior bargaining power the party confronts the public with a standardized adhesion contract of exculpation . . . 5) . . . and makes no provision whereby a purchaser may pay additional reasonable fees and obtain protection against negligence." 6) "Finally, as a result of the transaction, the person or property of the purchaser is placed under the control of the seller, subject to the risk of carelessness by the seller or his agents." If a contract both meets these factors and includes liability waivers, it may be held to be invalid and unenforceable as a matter of law and policy. ==Facts== The University of California at Los Angeles Medical Center, a research and education hospital, admitted Hugo Tunkl for treatment of a condition related to a particular condition under study at the time. As a condition of being admitted for treatment, the hospital required that Tunkl sign a contract that included the following provision: "RELEASE: The hospital is a nonprofit, charitable institution. In consideration of the hospital and allied services to be rendered and the rates charged therefor, the patient or his legal representative agrees to and hereby releases The Regents of the University of California, and the hospital from any and all liability for the negligent or wrongful acts or omissions of its employees, if the hospital has used due care in selecting its employees." Tunkl signed and was admitted for treatment. He later brought suit against the Medical Center to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have resulted from the negligence of two of his treating physicians. Mr. Tunkl died after the suit was brought, and his wife, as the executrix of his estate, was substituted as plaintiff in the action. 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「Tunkl v. Regents of the University of California」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|