If consumer goods are sold under a contract that excludes consequential damages, and the buyer is later physically injured because of a defect in the goods, the exclusion of consequential damages is prima facie unconscionable and is not binding.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

This statement is true as per the doctrine of unconscionability, which holds that a contract term can be rendered unenforceable if it is found to be excessively one-sided or oppressive. In the case of consumer goods, excluding consequential damages in a contract can be considered unconscionable if the defect in the goods causes physical harm to the buyer. Therefore, the exclusion of consequential damages would not be binding in such a scenario.

If Consumer Goods Are Sold Under a Contract That Excludes