Top Left Background Top Right Background
Bottom Right Background

Curtis v Chemical Cleaning & Dyeing Co [1951]

Facts

  • The claimant signed a contract for the cleaning of her wedding dress without reading, which provided that no liability would be accepted for damage caused to the dress in its entirety
  • She was told that the document said only liability to beads and sequins was excluded
  • The dress was returned with a stain on it

Issue

  • Could damages be claimed? Was the exclusion clause effective

Decision

  • Claim succeeded, not incorporated

Reasoning

  • Misrepresentation
Goto Top
Close Notification

Recent News

Other News