[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, it can be argued that this clause does not constitute part of the contract. According to the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2021), when concluding a contract using standard clauses, the party providing the standard clauses shall determine the rights and obligations between the parties in accordance with the principle of fairness, and shall adopt reasonable methods to alert the other party to clauses that exempt or mitigate its responsibilities or are of great significance to the other party's interests, and provide explanations of such clauses upon the other party's request. If the party providing the standard clauses fails to fulfill its obligation of alerting or explaining, resulting in the other party not noticing or understanding clauses of great significance to its interests, the other party may argue that such clauses do not constitute part of the contract. In addition, if the standard clauses unreasonably exempt or mitigate the provider's responsibilities, increase the other party's responsibilities, restrict the other party's main rights, or exclude the other party's main rights, such standard clauses shall be invalid. Where there are disputes over the interpretation of the standard clauses, they shall be interpreted in accordance with their ordinary meaning. If there are two or more interpretations, the interpretation that is less favorable to the party providing the standard clauses shall prevail.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

Standard form clauses are widely used in fields such as finance, insurance, telecommunications, online shopping, and property management. There are three typical scenarios: the disclaimer clauses in the contract are in the same font as the main text and are not highlighted; the operator restricts consumers' rights with internal rules; and the ambiguity of the clauses leads to disputes. Under different circumstances, the validity of the clauses varies.

II. Key points of contention

First, which clauses belong to those with significant interests to the other party. Second, whether the obligation of giving notice and making explanations has been fulfilled in a reasonable manner. Third, whether the legal consequences of non-fulfillment of obligations are invalid or not considered as part of the contract. Fourth, the specific circumstances under which standard clauses are invalid. Fifth, the unfavorable interpretation rules when interpreting disputes over clauses. These issues determine whether the clauses can bind the parties to the contract.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

Henglue Lawyers have summarized three key experiences in contract dispute practice. First, the obligation of giving warnings and explanations: The party providing standard terms shall take reasonable measures to alert and explain to the other party regarding clauses that significantly affect the other party's interests, such as exempting or reducing its own liabilities, imposing additional obligations on the other party, or restricting the other party's main rights. Reasonable methods include bolding, enlarging fonts, and requiring separate signatures, which are sufficient to draw the other party's attention. Second, distinguishing legal consequences: If the party fails to fulfill its obligation of giving warnings or explanations, resulting in the other party not noticing or understanding the relevant clauses, the other party may claim that the clause does not constitute part of the contract and is therefore not binding on the other party. However, if the clause itself unreasonably exempts liabilities, imposes additional obligations on the other party, or restricts or excludes the other party's main rights, it is invalid. Although the two approaches differ, they achieve similar results. Third, typical invalid situations: Standard clauses that unreasonably exempt or reduce the party's liabilities, impose additional obligations on the other party, or restrict the other party's main rights are invalid. In addition, exemption clauses that cause personal injury to the other party or those that exempt the party from liability for intentional or gross negligence in causing property damage may also be invalid. Fourth, unfavorable interpretation rules: In the event of disputes over the interpretation of standard clauses, the clauses shall be interpreted in accordance with their ordinary meaning. If there are multiple interpretations, the interpretation unfavorable to the party providing the standard clauses shall prevail. Where the standard clauses are inconsistent with non-standard clauses, the non-standard clauses shall prevail. Fifth, evidentiary highlights: The party claiming that the clause does not constitute part of the contract shall prove that the provider failed to give warnings or explanations in a reasonable manner and may submit the contract text, records of the signing process, and communication records. Sixth, practical tips: When accepting standard contracts, parties should focus on reading exemption clauses, penalties for breach of contract, and jurisdiction clauses and retain evidence of the provider's failure to provide warnings. Providers should standardize their methods of giving warnings and retain evidence of their fulfillment of obligations to reduce the risk of the clauses being rejected. In summary, failure to fulfill the obligation of giving warnings and explanations and unreasonable clause content are the two main defense approaches against standard clauses. This case is handled by the professional lawyer team of Beijing Henglue Law Firm (the practice certificates shall be subject to the documents issued by the judicial administrative authorities). 恒略律师在合同纠纷业务中总结了三点经验。其一，提示说明义务：提供格式条款的一方应对免除或减轻其责任、加重对方责任、限制对方主要权利等与对方有重大利害关系的条款，采取合理方式提示并按要求说明；合理方式包括加粗、放大字体、单独签字确认等，足以引起对方注意。其二，法律后果区分：未履行提示或说明义务，导致对方未注意或理解相关条款的，对方可主张该条款不成为合同内容，即该条款对对方不产生约束力；而条款本身不合理地免除责任、加重对方责任、限制对方主要权利的，则属无效，二者路径不同但效果相近。其三，典型无效情形：不合理地免除或减轻其责任、加重对方责任、限制对方主要权利，排除对方主要权利的格式条款无效；此外，造成对方人身损害的免责条款、因故意或重大过失造成对方财产损失的免责条款，也可能无效。其四，不利解释规则：对格式条款的理解发生争议的，先按通常理解解释；存在两种以上解释的，应作出不利于提供格式条款一方的解释；格式条款与非格式条款不一致的，应当采用非格式条款。其五，举证要点：主张条款不成为合同内容的一方，应证明提供方未以合理方式提示或说明，可提交合同文本、签署过程记录与沟通记录。其六，实务提示：接受格式合同时应重点阅读免责、违约金、管辖等条款并保留对方未提示的证据；提供方则应规范提示方式并保留已尽义务的证据，降低条款被否定的风险。综合来看，未履行提示说明义务与条款内容不合理是抗辩格式条款的两条主要路径。本案由北京恒略律师事务所专业律师团队（执业证号以司法行政机关核发证件为准）代理。

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

Action suggestions: First, focus on reviewing clauses such as exemption of liability, breach of contract penalties, and jurisdiction; Second, preserve evidence that the other party failed to provide clarification; Third, distinguish between two approaches to assert claims: either arguing that the clause is not part of the contract or arguing that the clause is invalid; Fourth, make good use of the rule of adverse interpretation. For matters involving contract clauses and dispute resolution, you may refer to the following resources for reference:Business and contract disputes in enterprisesFor disputes involving consumption and business operations, you can refer to the following cases for reference.Special services; For matters related to the execution of judgments, you can refer to the following documents for reference.Creditor's rights and debts, and enforcementLegal basis: Articles 496, 497, and 498 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2021), as well as relevant provisions on the validity of exemption clauses. The specific application shall be subject to the currently effective laws, regulations, and judicial rulings.

5. Henglue Law Firm's Reminder

Firstly, if the format clause is not clearly explained, the other party may claim that it does not constitute part of the contract. Secondly, any clause that unreasonably exempts the provider from liability is invalid. Thirdly, if there are disputes over the interpretation of the clause, the interpretation that is unfavorable to the provider shall prevail. Fourthly, when accepting a standardized contract, the party should retain evidence of the clauses that were not clearly explained by the other party. For disputes involving standardized clauses in their entirety, a comprehensive solution can be obtained through legal means.Business and contract disputes in enterprisesThe service is supported. For more information, please visitThe official website of Beijing Henglue Law FirmI understand.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Is a standard clause always invalid if there's no notification about it?

Not necessarily. If the party fails to fulfill the obligation to provide explanations, the other party may claim that the clause does not constitute part of the contract; if the content of the clause is unreasonable, it may be directly invalidated.

Q2: Which clauses must be highlighted?

For clauses that are of great significance to the other party, such as exempting or reducing the provider's liability, increasing the other party's liability, or restricting the other party's main rights, they all need to be reasonably highlighted and explained.

Q3: What constitutes a reasonable tip?

Bold fonts, enlarged fonts, and individually signed confirmations are all effective ways to draw the other party's attention; however, if the notifications are simply formatted in the same way as the main text without any distinction, they may not be easily recognized as reminders.

Q4: What should I do if there are two interpretations of the terms?

It shall be interpreted in accordance with the general understanding. Where there are more than two interpretations, the interpretation unfavorable to the party providing the standard terms shall be adopted, and the non-standard terms shall prevail in application.

Q5: How to prove that the other party did not give any hints?

You can submit the contract text, records of the signing process, and communication materials to prove that the relevant clauses were not reasonably highlighted or explained, thereby claiming that they do not constitute part of the contract.

The above content is based on the compilation of judicial practices in the Beijing area. The facts of individual cases and the jurisdiction of the court may affect the conclusions. Welcome to consult Henglue Lawyers for specific situations.

If you are currently facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the relevant evidence materials to avoid missing the statutory time limits. →Business and commercial legal services·Beijing Henglu Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and open adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. If you encounter disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.