Disney join other large companies such as Airbnb and Walmart in the firing line as they continue to use strategies within their contracts that attempt to get them out of lawsuits that they face from consumers of their products, also known as a disadvantaging plaintiff.
The consequences of the contracts are becoming more and more severe if not followed accordingly, even if they aren’t made aware.
The backlash for Disney comes after a current lawsuit they are involved in is being argued that it cannot go ahead.
The current lawsuit has been enforced by a widower who has sued the Disney theme park on behalf of his dead wife after she suffered a fatal allergic reaction from a meal she ate at one of the Disney parks back in 2023. Disney has responded by asking that the case does not go before a jury, which is also known as a dispute to arbitration.
Disney’s argument against the widower comes from the subscriber agreement the widower in question made [for Disney+), that did include an arbitration clause, also included the Terms of Conditions where he bought the Epcot tickets for the 2023 family trip – the tickets were never used.
The tickets were never used as his wife had died 2 days prior to the planned Epcot trip.
The widower’s lawyers have argued that the he believes he only signed up for the free trial period which is a month long, with the subscription being cancelled before he was charged.
Many customers across different platforms may sign their rights away when signing the Terms and Conditions which can include potentially not being able to sue them in the future.
