Another company is denying customers the right to sue due to serious consequences, citing a licensing agreement. The last time it was Disney, and now it's Uber.
John and Georgia McGinty, a married couple from New Jersey, were riding in an Uber taxi in March 2022 when they got into an accident. Both survived, but Georgia spent a week in the intensive care unit with a spinal fracture and abdominal injury, while John sustained "only" broken ribs and an arm injury. When the McGintys tried to file a lawsuit, the judge refused because they allegedly agreed to arbitration clauses in Uber's terms of use when their underage daughter ordered pizza through Uber Eats.
"We believe that the arbitration provision contained in the agreement, which Georgia or her minor daughter agreed to by using her mobile phone, is valid and enforceable."
"How could I ever think that my ability to defend my constitutional rights in court would be stripped away just because I ordered food?" John states.
Arbitration does not mean the couple will end up empty-handed. However, it is a more unpredictable process that often favors large corporations. The rules for presenting evidence are significantly less stringent, and victims cannot appeal an arbitrator's decision. It remains uncertain whether the arbitrator will award them enough money to cover the substantial medical debt they incurred during their recovery from injuries.
This situation seems familiar: previously, Disney attempted to deny a lawsuit regarding a death from an allergic reaction to food at a Disney World restaurant. The company argued that the lawsuit was impossible due to similar terms of service for Disney+. However, Disney changed its stance due to media backlash. Journalists from various outlets are hopeful that this case will also compel Uber to relent.
Sources: Jalopnik, Independent, BBC
Comments (0)
There are no comments for now