一个领先的情况下与免责条款的设立相关的是，我‟疏远V graucob [。我‟疏远V graucob [ 1934 ] 2 KB 394 ]。在这种情况下，自动售货机的买方受到一个非常宽泛的排除条款的约束，该条款在买方签署的小订单上存在。在这方面，它是由斯克拉顿LJ说。当一方签署包含合同条款的文件时，如果没有欺诈或虚假陈述，签署该文件的各方受条款约束，如果该方已阅读该文件，则无关系。在这种情况下，法院采取客观的态度倾向。因此，如果一方当事人签署了一份文件，可以合理地说，该一方同意包含该合同的文件中提到的所有条款。然而，法院在此案中采用的办法也遭到了严厉的批评。
As mentioned above, in order to rely on an exclusion clause, it is important that this type of clause is properly included in the contract. For this purpose, it needs to be noted that an exclusion clause cannot be included in the contract after the contract has been concluded. For example, in a signed contract that contains the clause, generally because present in the contract document will have the effect of including the clause in the contract. On the other hand, if a signed document of contract is not present but printed documents or notice is present through which the terms of the contract have been mentioned, such terms can be included in the contract if these terms have been brought to the notice of the other party before concluding the contract.
A leading case related with the incorporation of an exclusion clause is that of L‟Estrange v Graucob[ . L‟Estrange v Graucob  2 KB 394]. In this case, the buyer of a vending machine was bound by a very broad exclusion clause that was present on the order form signed by the purchaser in small print. In this regard, it was stated by Scrutton LJ. that when a party signed the document containing the terms of the contract, then if there is no fraud or misrepresentation, the parties signing the document is bound by the terms and it does not matter if such a party has read the document or not. In this case, the court adopted an objective approach towards intention. Therefore, if a document has been signed by a party, it can be reasonably said that such a party agrees to all the terms mentioned in the document containing the contract. However, the approach adopted by the court in this case has also been criticized heavily.