Essay on "Mooting Assessment Problem Solving"

Quoted Instructions for "Mooting Assessment Problem Solving" Assignment:

University of the East of England v Edwards

In the Court of Appeal

Ms Edwards is a student at the University of the East of England. She lives in halls of residence, and pays £140 per week for her accommodation, £20 a week less than she would pay for the equivalent private rental property in her area. Her tenancy agreement includes the following terms:

(a) Students are prohibited from holding parties in the accommodation without the prior permission of the University;

(b) Collective liability will be imposed upon students for damage when the individual(s) responsible cannot be identified; each student will pay an equal proportion in respect of any such damage;

(c) The University accepts no liability in negligence for property damage suffered by students on University premises.

In order to raise money to pay for a holiday, Ms Edwards wants to hold a themed party in her university accommodation, and to charge each guest a £10 admission fee. She does not want to seek the permission of the University for this party, since she believes that her plan to charge an entrance fee, and the theme, *****˜music inspired by LSD*****, would be unacceptable to it and she thinks that term (a) is *****˜unfair***** and therefore contrary to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Ms Edwards also thinks that term (c) unfair because it is *****˜unreasonable***** and therefore contrary to s.2(2) of the Unfair Contract Terms Act (UCTA) 1977. This term concerns her because her MP3 player has been broken in her halls of residence by the University*****s negligence.

The trial judge accepts Ms Edwards***** argument, holding:

SENIOR

(1) That term (a), considered in the light of term (b), is unfair under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, and therefore not binding on her;

JUNIOR

And

(2) That term (c) is unreasonable under UCTA. The University is appealing against both findings.

The University is appealing against both findings.

Bibliography format / citation style: Footnote

This is a case given for a mooting assessment (UK). My position in the mooting assessment is JUNIOR APPELLANT.

Junior Apellant appeals against the decision(s) of the lower court and argues that the appeal should be allowed. According to the given case, you should argue AGAINST the statement that the term (c ) is unreasonable under UCTA. You are only concerned with the second argument. Please read the full statute (the unfair contract terms act(UCTA) 1977 ) before putting your arguments. Please try to rebut the possible counter arguments and be persuasive.

You can refer to a total of 3 authorities (cases, statutes, secondary sources) Thanks in advance.