Bailment involves one person putting his or her personal property into the care of another. The responsibility to look after that property is often limited in the contract creating that relationship. Do you think that a party agreeing to be responsible to look after another’s property, either in the process of repair, storage, or otherwise, ought to be able to contract out of their responsibilities with an exemption clause? This question really is much broader. This is because, whenever an exemption clause is included in any contract, one party is severely disadvantaged. Should the parties to contracts, especially where the bailment of goods is involved, be able to contract out of such basic responsibilities? In your discussion, consider the often unequal bargaining power of the parties, the consideration between the parties and standard form contracts.