Thornton v. Shoe Lane Parking

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thornton v. Shoe Lane Parking, [1971] 1 All ER 686 is a famous English case on contract law written by Lord Denning. The case states that for an exclusion clause to be incorporated into a contract the party drafting the contract must give the affected party sufficient notice.

[edit] Background

The claimant sought to challenge notices at the defendant’s car park that purported to exclude the car park’s liability for negligence. The reason why the claimant was moved to do this was because he had been injured while using the car park and the notices stood in the way of his claim for compensation.

[edit] Opinion of the Court

Lord Denning ruled that the exclusion clause did not form part of the valid contract. The true moment that the contract was formed was before the ticket was dispensed and so the terms on the back of the ticket did not apply.

Denning further found that the warning posted within the car park was insufficient.

The contents of the ticket were irrelevant, as the contract was made prior to the ticket being issued. However, even if the ticket were issued before making the contract, the carpark had not taken reasonable steps to bring the exclusion clause to Thornton's attention. The clause was very wide, wider than that which would reasonably be expected. Only very explicit notice of its existence would have been sufficient. A notice saying 'All cars parked at owner's risk' was not satisfactory. Lord Denning MR regarded as terms, they 'would need to be printed in red ink with a red hand pointing to it before the notice was sufficient'.