Question

2. The parcel that fell off the truck and hit Andy was subsequently crushed by an oncoming car. The parcel contained new Apple equipment that was ordered by and addressed to Brian, who lived just 20 metres from the accident site. As a result of not receiving his new computer equipment on time Brian was late paying his rent and electricity bills, and he incurred $300 in late fees to his landlord and electricity provider. The terms and conditions of carriage, which are clearly stated on TMI's web site, include cl 41b, which says 'TMT Ltd accepts no responsibility for goods damaged in transit or consequential losses' and d 41f, which says 'Any dispute arising under this agreement shall be referred to and finally determined by the arbitrator listed in Schedule A.' Brian declined the optional transit insurance when he purchased the computer equipment. In your answer address: what cause of action Brian has against TMT; whether TMT has any legal argument to defeat Brian's claim; and why the exclusion clause and arbitration clause will ensure that Brian cannot sue TMT.

Answer 1

The cause of action is the damaged Apple equipment as product being send in parcel by TMT .yes the TMT has a legal argument to defeat brain claim as they have maintained in 41b that the TMT Ltd accepts no responsibility for goods damaged in transit or consequential losses also there is another clause of 41f which says that any arguments shall be referred to and determined by the arbitrator entailed in schedule A. These two clauses have been accepted by the brian while purchasing so if he makes claims for the product being damaged he will be arbitrated by the said arbitrator in schedule A and there is also the clause of 49b which does not take care of any product being damaged in the transit process.