Law Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for legal professionals, students, and others with experience or interest in law. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
Subject to statutory provisions, all Provider’s warranties, conditions, and representations (whether written or oral), or other terms implied by statute or common law are excluded to the fullest extent permissible by law.
I am not sure how to understand this part, especially the passage in bold. Does it mean that the common law is not the guarantor whether the conditions are in accordance with the law? Does it mean that mentioned Provider is not held responsible?
In English, it would read something like "Provider makes no other warranties, conditions, representations, etc, except whatever the law forces us to make."
In most cases, when people exchange money for a product or service, certain things are implied in the deal, at least from the buyer's side -- for example, that a thing being sold is fit for doing what it does (warranty of merchantability), or that a service being provided meets a certain minimum standard (warranty of workmanlike quality). Most places allow you to explicitly unpromise some/all of those things, but some recognize more of these implied promises than others, and some restrict just how much you can unpromise.
The clause you're asking about basically just tries to unpromise everything that's not explicitly in the contract. If the law doesn't let you unpromise a certain thing, then that thing is still promised, but to the barest minimum the law requires.
