Enforceability of exemption clauses in construction contracts: A comparative study of approaches in England and Australia

Donohoe S, C J (2013) Enforceability of exemption clauses in construction contracts: A comparative study of approaches in England and Australia. In: Smith, S D and Ahiaga-Dagbui, D D (eds.) Proceedings of 29th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September 2013, Reading, UK.

Abstract

Exemption clauses are commonly provided in contracts by parties in the construction industry in an attempt to limit their liability for loss or exclude such liability altogether. The operation of exemption clauses in a legal context, however, has proved to have been fraught with great difficulties in both England and Australia. This paper seeks to address the question, “How does the enforcement of exemption clauses under Australian Law differ from the law of England?” A doctrinal legal research approach is used to establish the legal rules relating to the enforceability of exemption clauses in England and Australia. Once established, these rules are then compared and contrasted. The research found that, although the relevant law in both jurisdictions shared a common origin (the traditional English common law), there are now significant differences. These differences are primarily due to statutory regulation of exemption clauses introduced into England but not Australia, and the development and divergence of the Australian common law with respect to interpretation of exemption clauses. This paper provides a useful summary of the law pertaining to exemption clauses and, as such, will be of interest to construction and legal professionals and academics. The comparison of the law between England and Australia with respect to exemption clauses highlights an important debate as to whether freedom to contract should be regulated in commercial contracts.

Item Type: Conference Paper (Paper)
Uncontrolled Keywords: exemption clause; construction contract; contract law; unfair contract terms
Index terms: jurisdiction, Australia, liability, contract term, contract law, England, construction industry, enforcement, regulation, construction contract, comparative study
Subjects: political science, liability law, industry analysis, health safety and environment, Geography, contractual condition, contract law, legal systems, research design and methodology, contract type
Topics: Legal Issues, Contract Administration, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Procurement, Governance
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTA

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here