LAW CASE STUDY (Topic-2)
"The core idea of negligence is that people should exercise reasonable care when they act by taking account of the potential harm that they might foreseeably cause harm to other people.”
In this particular case are there many contractual terms that are used. So, to solve this case or before giving any judgement, we need to define these terms and gain sufficient knowledge about them. The first and the most important thing we need to know is: What is a contract? A contract is an agreement which is enforceable by the court of law. For a legal contract there has to be an offer and its acceptance. “Acceptance occurs when the party answering the ...view middle of the document...
 A standard form of contract is an exception to the rule of acceptance as one can not accept it. Firms or organizations who operates on a large scale find it difficult to enter into a contract with each different individual person. So a standard contract is a list of many different contracts printed on a piece of paper. They restrict and do not include liability in a contract. Another contractual term is an implied contract. Implied terms are those terms which the law implies into a contract notwithstanding the fact that they have not been discussed by the parties or referred to in a contract. They may be implied at common law or by statute.
Mia parks her car in a “Safe and Reliable Car Park Pty Ltd”, in the Melbourne CBD, for the first time. At the entrance there is a sign which says: ‘Cars parked at owner’s risk. Please leave keys in ignition. Pay at cashier’s office”. Mia then drives to the cashier's office, pays the parking fees but she did not leave her car keys in the ignition so she was immediately stopped by an attendant because other attendants might need to move Mia's car if another customer wants to come out of the car park premises. So Mia hands him the keys and goes off to work. When she comes back from work, she is shocked to see that both the front end and the back of her car are badly dented and car is parked outside the car park premises. Afterwards, she goes to Jack, the director of the company which owns the car park and questions him about the serious matters. Jack apologies and says the damages to the back of her car happened when one of the attendants was moving her car to allow another customer to leave the car park. While reversing her car, the attendant bumped into another car right behind in the row where Mia's car was originally parked. Whereas her front end of the car was damaged when her car was parked outside in the street and another car that was parked in front of Mia's car, reversed very quickly, collided with her car. That car owner could not be tracked down because he sped off very fast. Jack then added that Mia's car was parked out because they had a 'hectic' day and at one stage, there were too many cars in the car park. So Jack told one attendant to park Mia's car outside the car park until a space could be found inside the park. After hearing all this Mia is very disturbed and tells Jacks that she will take legal action against the car park for all the damages done to her car. Immediately Jack refers to the ticket issued to Mia in the morning and further adds that because of the contents of the ticket, the car park is not liable for the damage to Mia's car. He also draws her attention to the notice at the entrance and says for both of these reasons, theres no liability exists in relation to her car. The ticket to which Jack refers contains the following provision: ‘no responsibility is accepted for loss or damage to any vehicle, howsoever such loss or damage may arise or be...