判决理由
An exclusion clause can be effective even in cases of fundamental breach, provided it is clear enough to cover the breach in question. The doctrine of fundamental breach as a rule of law was rejected.
事实
Securicor provided a night patrol service for Photo Production's factory. One of Securicor's employees deliberately started a fire that destroyed the factory. Securicor relied on an exclusion clause limiting liability.
判决摘要
The House of Lords held that the exclusion clause was effective. Lord Wilberforce rejected the 'rule of law' approach to fundamental breach, holding that whether an exclusion clause covers a particular breach is a matter of construction of the contract.
关键引述
"It is not correct to say that an exclusion clause can never apply to a fundamental breach. The question is always one of construction."
— Lord Wilberforce
后续处理
Established that exclusion clauses are to be construed according to their terms, not struck down by a rule of law.