any lawyers out there, i've got a simple question in contratcs?

Question

if a person gets injured in a swiming pool, but there are signs stating that the managment is exempt from any damage that is made to anyone getting in the pool,

what can the person do? what legal ground does he have against them?

is their exemption legal?

im doing an essay, and theres a question 'what allegation can he make' (the guy who got injured, so im assuming that he CAN make some sort of allegation.

annnnd, let me just correct what i said;
his personal belonging were stolen from storage cabin while he was swiming and injured his muscle,
from my understanding, the allegation is in regard to the stolen belongings and not the injury. (the signs also state the pool managment is exempt from damage made to people's belongings.

what is the legal action he can take against them?
do they have to take responsibilty even though they've stated they are exempt of it?

his belonging were in a compartment designated for storage.

he injured his muscle while swiming, not really the pool's fault in my opinion..

doesn't the sign count as a section or part of a Standard Contract ? (that's the answer i think im supposed to reach in my essay, that it is)..
so basically the managment cant just exempt itself from the damages made to the people on the premises?

but i still cant figure out what his legal ground would be.

(i know im being a complete idiot.. i'd like to believe its due to lack of sleep..)

Answer 1

This really isn't a contracts question, but more of a torts question.

Typically, one cannot absolve themselves from negligence. Think about whether this would be fundamentally fair. Would it be ok if Macy's were to put a sign up that said they were not responsible for any injuries on their premises? But then didn't bother to clean up a spill that they knew about.

2/3/07 - Ok, I think I understand what your asking. The question your reading probably states that there is a sign that says management is not responsible for theft of any personal effects. Correct?

Assuming this is what you're referring to, then the answer is it depends. Typically, you'd need to show there was some sort of negligence on part of the pool before you could claim any damages, i.e. was the area that the items were stolen from monitored? Did the pool give the idea that the area was safe and secure?

Answer 2

The disclaimer notice will not protect the management from liability where there is a defect in, say, the ladder/steps letting you get into the pool, or where your swimming costume is ruined because of fresh paint around the side of the pool (not far fetched, I've been in a pool like that!) or where the sides of the pool are greasy so that a person slips, etc. etc. Likewise if they turn a blind eye to rowdy ruffians whose delight is in pushing people in, then they may well be liable. There is, of course, the issue of reasonable behaviour on the part of the persons using the pool. If you behave like an idiot and, say, start performing handstands around the edge, or dive off the board in a crazy manner, then you can't expect to be able to blame the management. However, in general terms, the management cannot use a disclaimer notice to evade liability in circumstances such as those mentioned. They have a responsibility to people using the pool.
Personal belongings: Here the situation is more complex. The disclaimer notice has greater effect, as the use of the locker is left very much to the discretion of the person using it and the issue of whether or not it is left locked and whether or not the key is negligently left in the lock so that a thief can help himself is outside the management's control. Provided that the lockers sound and fit for the task, then the management cannot be held liable for anything happening to the things inside.

Answer 3

No that is wrong (unless the swimming pool is on private property. Im working on the assumption that it is a public swimming pool) The Unfair Contract Terms Act of 1999 (i think, i forget the date) says that business premises cannot exclude themselves from liability in that way. That notice is void, and therefore they can still be liable. You can then claim compensation under the Occupiers Liability Act 1957. Basically youd need to prove that you were a visitor (ie somebody with express or implied permission to be on the property) obviously you are a visitor, and have both express (form the ticket for payment) and implied (its a business premise that is open for trading)permission to be on the property. Need to prove that there is a defect with the premises and that they ought have taken reasonable steps to negate the danger. So without knowing exactly what happened its impossible to say whether youd be successful.

Answer 4

Check with local statutes as well. This is more of a Tort question rather than a contract question.

And management cannot exempt themselves if they are negligent in any way. Key words are "if" and "negilgent" It all depends on the facts of your situation.

EDIT:

The sign is more of an issue of whether it is a valid exculpatory agreement. You'll have grounds to sue, i guess, but it depends on what the common law in your jurisdiction is. This is where case law research becomes necessary.

Answer 5

Yes you do have rights. It doesn't matter how many signs they put up, they cannot dismiss there responsibilities under Health and Safety legislation. If they are found to have been in breach, then the door is open for injured parties to seek compensation in the civil courts.

EDIT:

If you don't know what you are talking about, it is probably best if you don't attempt to answer this sort of question.

Answer 6

If the owner of the pool has been negligent in some way and that negligence results in injury to someone then simply putting up a sign doesn't absolve them of responsibility.

I could drive around with a sign on my car saying you cant sue me if i run you over, but it wouldnt mean anything.

Answer 7

Frasier is right, signs or not, they have the responsibility of anything that goes on in that pool. Unless the person injured was doing something extreme, fault goes to the owner of the facility.

Answer 8

well, then none unfortunately. They have given notice, you cannot sue.