"At the owner's risk" signs - worth anything?

Time Magazine

Forest Master wrote: »

I always thought that Dry Cleaners aren't libel for ruining your clothes. Drop them in at your own risk, etc... don't they have those signs everywhere?

star-pants wrote: »

Yup having worked in a nightclub myself, it's at your own risk to leave stuff in the cloakroom(in most places anyway).

I know some legislation requires posting signs (about alcohol policy, etc.) but in general do these signs carry any weight? Surely the Supply of Good and Services Act wins in the battle of Stupid Sign vs. Law?

Time Magazine

Time Magazine wrote: »

I know some legislation requires posting signs (about alcohol policy, etc.) but in general do these signs carry any weight? Surely the Supply of Good and Services Act wins in the battle of Stupid Sign vs. Law?

There is a pretty solid lump of case law on car parks not being able to get away with those signs unless they were basically in 15ft tall neon at the entrance.

I am pretty sure, particularly with the coat check stuff, that since the fundamental purpose of the contract would be to put your coat in a safe place while you enjoy their establishment, that any sign which purported to exclude liability would be held to have no effect.

There might be some scope for the Unfair Contract Terms Directive (EEC) 93/13 but mostly I'd imagine the courts would go along the lines of the ticket cases with regards to exemption clauses like that.

Reloc8

I would agree with the OP.

Quite frequently persons posting exclusion clauses up like this on their premises or other places are doing so as there will be a certain amount of people who will believe themselves to be barred from action as a result in actions for negligence/breach of contract. As noted, in a relationship governed by contract the Court will look to see what the operative terms were, having regard to legislation and common law decisions which precludes certain types of clauses in certain types of contracts, implies other terms into certain types of contracts, and requires certain types of clauses to be made obvious to the other party to the contract.

An example as regards tort occurs to me in respect of Dublin Bus, which have a notice on their vehicles to the effect that incidents involving passengers must be reported before alighting and subsequently reported incidents 'will not be entertained' (of course failure to report may damage your credibility but it would not necessarily by a long shot lead to inevitable failure of a claim).

dermot_sheehan

They attempt to argue that the consumer has voluntary accepted the risk of whatever activity the sign was place above.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volenti_non_fit_injuria

However the common law states that unusual terms in contracts must be brought to the specific attention of a consumer and are difficult to incorporate by signage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thornton_v_Shoe_Lane_Parking_Ltd


Also the EC (Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts) Regulations 1997 hold unenforceable a term in a consumer contract which:

( a ) excluding or limiting the legal liability of a seller or supplier in the event of the death of a consumer or personal injury to the latter resulting from an act or omission of that seller or supplier;