Question

Hammer regularly took his car to be serviced at his local garage, Vanilla Ice Limited. On several occasions before handing his car over to the garage, Vanilla Ice always required Hammer to read and sign a contractual document which contained the following statement in big bold red type; “Vanilla Ice Ltd accepts no responsibility for any consequential loss or injury sustained as a result of any work carried out by the company, whether as a result of negligence or otherwise.”

On the most recent visit to the garage, Vanilla Ice was very busy when Hammer arrived and because of that fact Hammer was not asked to sign the usual document. He was however, given a receipt for his car, which he accepted without reading. Vanilla Ice’s usual business terms were printed on the back of the receipt in red, including the said contractual term stated above.

On his way home after servicing, Hammer was severely injured when the car suddenly burst into flames. It subsequently emerged that the fire had been as a result of the negligent work done by one of Vanilla Ice’s mechanic. Vanilla Ice has accepted that its mechanic was negligent, but denies any liability for Hammer’s injuries, relying on the exclusion clause above.

Advise Hammer on whether the exclusion clause was incorporated into his contract with Vanilla Ice Ltd

Answer 1

Despite the exclusion clause having mentioned in the receipt which Hammer received from Vanilla Ice, the onus of the injuries to Hammer are on the latter. Vanilla Inc.'s duty was to ensure proper servicing of Hammer's car. The injury was caused due to negligent work done by one of Vanilla Ice's mechanic. And, further, Vanilla Ice accepted that their mechanic had been negligent. Thus, it is liable for all the injuries caused to Hammer due to the negligent behavior of their employee.