According to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, which of the following clauses would be automatically void?

The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 places specific restrictions on clauses that attempt to limit or exclude liability in contracts, particularly regarding negligence. Option B is correct because the Act makes it clear that a clause excluding liability for negligence that results in personal injury is automatically void.

This provision is rooted in the public policy considerations aimed at protecting individuals from circumstances where negligence could lead to serious harm or injury. Personal injury is regarded with a heightened level of scrutiny, and therefore parties cannot simply agree to waive their right to claim for injuries resulting from negligent actions. The law seeks to ensure that individuals have a right to claim damages for personal injury caused by another's negligence, regardless of the terms that may have been included in a contract.

In contrast, the other options pertain to liability for property damage, financial loss, or breach of contract, which may still be subject to scrutiny under the Act but are treated differently. For example, while clauses excluding negligence for property damage would not be automatically void, they would still need to meet the requirements of reasonableness under the Act to be enforceable. Similarly, clauses concerning financial losses or breach of contract may also be examined for their reasonableness, but are not explicitly rendered void like those pertaining to personal injury