Multiple Choice
Why was the dry cleaning company held to be liable in Curtis v Chemical Cleaning & Dyeing Co [1951] 1 KB 805?
A) Because the contract so provided.
B) Because the exemption clause in the contract was illegal.
C) Because exemption clauses are not enforceable.
D) Because the purpose of the exemption clause in the contract was misrepresented by the shop assistant.
Correct Answer:

Verified
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q32: Which of the following statements is the
Q33: Which of the following is NOT an
Q34: In the case of a written contract,the
Q35: Which of the following is NOT an
Q36: If a collateral contract is inconsistent with
Q38: If a contract contains uncertain or meaningless
Q39: Which of the following is NOT necessary
Q40: Why was the plaintiff unsuccessful in the
Q41: Which of the exceptions to the parol
Q42: What was the reason for the decision