45824Re: [Czechlist] UNCLEAR LEGAL SENTENCE
- Apr 6, 2011It's a), but it isn't "breach of contract" - just "contract". The client
shall not be liable for 1-5, regardless of how this liability came to
be. (i.e., by contract, because of a tort, from a breach of statutory
duty, as a result of restitution or otherwise)
As for "restitution", it can either mean "compensation" (see
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/restitution) or maybe they
actually mean "restituce" (Is the text from a Czech or central/eastern
European company? it could be that the author of the text is writing in
a post-communist context...)
On 4/6/2011 9:53 AM, Matej Klimes wrote:
> Hi list,
> need a quick (due today noon-ish) advice on the following sentence:
> COMPANY X SHALL NOT BE LIABLE **(WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT (INCLUDING
> NEGLIGENCE), BREACH OF STATUTORY DUTY, RESTITUTION OR OTHERWISE)** FOR
> ANY: (1) LOSS OF EARNINGS: (2) LOSS OF BUSINESS; (3) INDIRECT, SPECIAL,
> OR CONSEQUENTIAL LOSSES; (4) DAMAGE CAUSED BY NEGLIGENCE, REGARDLESS OF
> THE NATURE THEREOF (INCLUDING LOSS OF BUSINESS, LOSS OF DATA, COMPUTER
> BREAKDOWN OR MALFUNCTION); AND (5) ANY OTHER DAMAGE OR LOSS.
> What is the meaning of the bits between the asterisks aND ITS
> RELATIONSHIP TO THE REST?
> a) company is not liable for (1) to (5) regardless of whether the
> liability arises from breach of contract, tort, etc. etc. - what would
> be the meaning of restitution then?
> or b) is not liable for 1 to 5 based on contract, tort, etc??, again,
> what would be the meaning of restitution then?
> ... never seen this type of sentence structure before
> (it's an End user licence agreement for a software)
> Thanks for any explanations (and/or Czech translations if anyone has
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>