CAP. 71]
Control of Exemption Clauses
[1989 Ed.
"personal injury" (A) includes any disease and any impairment of
physical or mental condition.
(2) In the case of both contract and tort, sections 7 to 12 apply (except where the contrary is stated in section 11(4)) only to business liability, that is liability for breach of obligations or duties arising-
(a) from things done or omitted to be done by a person in the course
of a business (whether his own business or another's); or
(b) from the occupation of premises used for business purposes of
the occupier,
and references to liability are to be read accordingly; but liability of an occupier of premises for breach of an obligation or duty towards a person obtaining access to the premises for recreational or educational purposes, being liability for loss or damage suffered by reason of the dangerous state of the premises, is not a business liability of the occupier unless granting that person such access for the purposes concerned falls within the business purposes of the occupier.
(3) In relation to any breach of duty or obligation, it is immaterial whether the breach was inadvertent or intentional, or whether liability for it arises directly or vicariously.
[cf. 1977 c. 50 ss. 1 & 14 U.K.]
3.
The "reasonableness" test
(1) In relation to a contract term, the requirement of reasonableness for the purposes of this Ordinance and section 4 of the Misrepresentation Ordinance (Cap. 284) is satisfied only if the court or arbitrator determines that the term was a fair and reasonable one to be included having regard to the circumstances which were, or ought reasonably to have been, known to or in the contemplation of the parties when the contract was made.
(2) In determining for the purposes of section 11 or 12 whether a contract term satisfies the requirement of reasonableness, the court or arbitrator shall have regard in particular to the matters specified in Schedule 2; but this subsection does not prevent the court or arbitrator from holding, in accordance with any rule of law, that a term which purports to exclude or restrict any relevant liability is not a term of the contract.
(3) In relation to a notice (not being a notice having contractual effect), the requirement of reasonableness under this Ordinance is satisfied only if the court or arbitrator determines that it would be fair and reasonable to allow reliance on it, having regard to all the circumstances obtaining when the liability arose or (but for the notice) would have arisen.
(4) In determining (under this Ordinance or the Misrepresentation Ordinance (Cap.284)) whether a contract term or notice satisfies the requirement of reasonableness, the court or arbitrator shall have regard in particular (but without prejudice to subsection (2)) to whether (and, if so, to