TripleA and XXX companies are both major international conglomerates. They are negotiating a contract whereby TripleA will install a computer system for XXX. One clause in the contract states that TripleA will not be liable for damages caused by the negligent installation of the computer system, except that TripleA warrants the system and will fix any problem for a period of two years following installation. TripleA completes the installation of the computer system. XXX loads extensive amounts of information on the system, but all of it is destroyed because TripleA negligently installed the memory chips. TripleA fixes the memory, but XXX incurred significant expenses in recreating the lost information. XXX sues for these expenses. TripleA defends with the noted clause in the contract. Which of the following is correct?
a. XXX wins; exculpatory clauses are sometimes valid, but this one would not be valid.
b. TripleA wins; this exculpatory clause is enforceable.
c. XXX wins; this exculpatory clause is not valid because it is unconscionable.
d. XXX wins; these types of clauses are never enforceable.
Answer: B
If the answers is incorrect or not given, you can answer the above question in the comment box. If the answers is incorrect or not given, you can answer the above question in the comment box.