Finance Leases

Connecticut adopted Article 2A of the Uniform Commercial Code, which applies to any transaction regardless of form which creates a lease. (C.G.S.A. § 42a-2A-103)

Well prior to the adoption of Article 2A, however, Connecticut courts recognized the special nature of the commercial finance lease, generally upholding "hell or high water" clauses, warranty disclaimers, and liquidated damage clauses in such leases despite claims that such clauses were unconscionable. See Emlee Equipment Leasing Corp. v. Waterbury Transmission, Inc., 31 Conn. App. 455, 626 A.2d 307, 23 UCC Rep.Serv.2d 389 (Conn. App. 1993); Newcourt Communications Finance Corp. v. Best, 2001 WL 195399 (Conn. Super. 2001); Pitney Bowes Credit Corp. v. Escotel Software, Inc., 2002 WL 451015 (Conn. Super. 2002) (defenses of failure of consideration, fraudulent misrepresentation, timely rejection of the equipment and unconscionability rejected in finance lease context); IBM Credit Corp. v. Mark Facey & Co.,1995 WL 144198 (Conn. Super. 1995); Datronic Equipment Income Fund, XX, L.P. v. Healey Ford-Lincoln-Mercury, Inc., 1997 WL 133510 (Conn. Super. 1997) (upholding waiver of breach of warranty in finance lease).