Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.

X

London Drugs Ltd v Kuehne & Nagel International

[1993] 97 DLR (4th) 261

Case summary last updated at 03/01/2020 17:51 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case London Drugs Ltd v Kuehne & Nagel International

 D was storing a transformer owned by P valued at $32,000. The agreement between the parties included a limitation of liability clause which limited liability for damage to the transformer to $40. Two employees were moving the transformer with a forklift and negligently dropped it. London Drugs sued the two employees on the basis that they owed a separate duty of care and could not seek protection under the contract. Supreme court held that the employers, despite not being mentioned themselves in the contract, were exempted. Exemption clauses could be relied on by employees of a company where “(1) the limitation of liability clause must, either expressly or impliedly, extend its benefit to the employee(s) seeking to rely on it; and (2) the employee(s) seeking the benefit of the limitation of liability clause must have been acting in the course of their employment and must have been performing the very services provided for in the contract between their employer and the plaintiff when the loss occurred.” 

Have you seen Oxbridge Notes' best Contract Law study materials?

Our law notes have been a popular underground sensation for 10 years:

  • Written by Oxford & Cambridge prize-winning graduates
  • Includes copious adademic commentary in summary form
  • Concise structure relating cases and statutes into an easy-to-remember whole
  • Covers all major cases for LLB exams
  • Satisfaction guaranteed refund policy
  • Recently updated
Contract Law Notes

Contract Law Notes >>