SCHEDULE 2 Consumer contract terms which may be regarded as unfair
20 A term which has the object or effect of excluding or hindering the consumer's right to take legal action or exercise any other legal remedy, in particular by—
(a) requiring the consumer to take disputes exclusively to arbitration not covered by legal provisions,
(b) unduly restricting the evidence available to the consumer, or
(c) imposing on the consumer a burden of proof which, according to the applicable law, should lie with another party to the contract.
A term may be unfair where it excludes or hinders a consumer’s right to take legal action or exercise a legal remedy, particularly through specified compulsory arbitration (see paras [26]; [140]). Whether the particular foreign arbitration agreement fell within the listed category remained an issue capable of determination at the section 9(4) trial (see paras [133]; [140]).
The court treated restrictions making the consumer’s screen evidence irrelevant and server records conclusive as analogous to unduly restricting evidence available to the consumer. The analogy reinforced the unfairness of B1. (see paras [31], [114], [124])
Applies the Grey List example concerning terms requiring consumers to take disputes exclusively to arbitration not covered by legal provisions. The arbitration clause was not unfair in the circumstances. (see paras [180]-[197])
What each judgment says about Schedule 2, paragraph 20 is in the case-law panel in the full Act.