This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

AEG v Logic Resource Ltd [1996] CLC 265

By Oxbridge Law TeamUpdated 04/01/2024 06:58

Judgement for the case AEG v Logic Resource Ltd

Table Of Contents

  • Defendant made purchases from Plaintiff on Plaintiff’s standard order form (to sell on to Defendant’s customers in Iran) which stated that a full set of terms and conditions was available on request. Defendant didn’t request it.

  • Not included in the order form and not drawn to Defendant’s attention was a clause unusual to the industry, that defective equipment was to be returned to Plaintiff for repair/replacement at Defendant’s own expense.

  • Plaintiff refused to pay the cost of bringing the machine back from Iran and Plaintiff sued him for it.  

Hirst LJ

  • As the condition was onerous and unusual, to determine whether the condition had been incorporated into the contract, the correct test was whether notice of the condition had fairly and reasonably been brought to the attention of the defendant.

Hobhouse LJ

  • He said the rule was less important now that the “Unfair Contract Terms Act” had effect but the rule could still apply to cases that fell outside its protection. 

Any comments or edits about this case? Get in touch

For Further Study on AEG v Logic Resource Ltd

Contract Law Notes
1,511 total pages
747 purchased

Contract law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambrid...

Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.

Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️

Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.

Get Started
Claim every advantage to get a first in law
Contract Law Notes
1,511 total pages
747 purchased

Contract law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambrid...