"This appeal... raises a question of some importance to the very large number of people who are in the habit of using deck chairs to sit by the seaside at holiday resorts."
The above is a quote from the judgment of Slesser LJ in Chapelton v Barry Urban District Council. In this case, Mr Chapelton hires a deck chair for himself and for a Miss Andrews (who was this Miss Andrews? A girlfriend? A lover? His mother?). They both set up their chairs on a flat part of the beach, and then Chapelton goes to sit down on his and he falls through the canvas, jarring his back. As it happened, Chapelton received a receipt, the back of which said "The Council will not be liable for any accident or damage arisng from hire of chair". Fortunately for Chapelton, the receipt was not reasonably recognisable as a contractual document (because it was a receipt) and so Chapelton required a greater effort from the Council to ensure that he received notice of the terms, and thus they were never incorporated into the contract between the parties. Chapelton wins.
What a feel good story. They should make a feature-length film out of it, or something.
I don't like it when people hang a relative clause off what is really a genitive- it may sound less ideal, but it should really say 'a number of people which.' Maybe not.. strict grammatical rules vs sounding normal..
ReplyDeleteHow is this a feel-good story? Now the council is burdened with developing and issuing a separate contract to limit their liability; the cost of this will be borne by the ratepayer. Besides, Chapelton was probably fat.
ReplyDelete