Future Retirement Success
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks

Future Retirement Success

Business

Disney claims widower cannot sue over wife’s death at theme park restaurant due to Disney+ subscription agreement

by August 15, 2024
August 15, 2024
Disney claims widower cannot sue over wife’s death at theme park restaurant due to Disney+ subscription agreement

Disney has come under fire for arguing that a widower whose wife tragically died after suffering a severe allergic reaction at a Walt Disney World restaurant cannot pursue legal action against the company because he had previously signed up for a free trial of Disney’s streaming service, Disney+.

Kanokporn Tangsuan, a 42-year-old medical doctor, died after consuming food at Raglan Road Irish Pub and Restaurant in Disney Springs, Florida, despite her family’s repeated assurances from their server that the meal would be allergen-free. Following her death in October last year, her husband, Jeffrey Piccolo, filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, accusing the company of negligence in failing to properly train staff on handling food allergies.

However, Disney has sought to dismiss the case, citing the arbitration clause within the Disney+ Subscriber Agreement, which Piccolo agreed to when he signed up for the service in November 2019. The company claims that this clause applies to “all disputes,” including those involving its affiliates, which include Walt Disney Parks and Resorts.

Piccolo’s legal team has slammed Disney’s defence as “preposterous” and “surreal,” arguing that agreeing to a streaming service’s terms should not waive his right to a jury trial in a wrongful death case. The case has sparked a debate over the enforceability of arbitration clauses in consumer contracts, especially when applied to unrelated matters such as personal injury or wrongful death.

While Disney maintains that it is simply defending itself against an attempt to involve the company in a lawsuit related to a restaurant it does not directly own, the case raises broader questions about the reach of arbitration agreements and the rights of consumers. Legal experts have suggested that a judge may find it unreasonable to extend the arbitration clause from a streaming service contract to a wrongful death claim, particularly in a case involving such serious allegations.

The case continues to unfold as Piccolo seeks over $50,000 in damages for mental pain and suffering, funeral and medical expenses, and loss of income. Disney’s position has sparked widespread criticism and raised concerns about the ethical implications of using such contractual clauses to shield against legal liability in severe cases.

Read more:
Disney claims widower cannot sue over wife’s death at theme park restaurant due to Disney+ subscription agreement

0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
Celebrities have ‘incredibly powerful’ ability to influence election: Harvard study
next post
Pret A Manger leads high street coffee price hikes with 57% increase over five years, Greggs remains most affordable

You may also like

UK life sciences losing £15bn a year to...

March 24, 2025

A third of UK hospitality businesses ‘operating at...

June 2, 2025

Apple intelligence: How AI integration in IOS 18...

August 25, 2024

AWS to invest £8 billion in the UK,...

September 11, 2024

‘Rampant profiteering’: Unite asks Ofgem to cap power...

November 22, 2022

Strategic Ventures: How UK Businesses Navigate Investments in...

January 17, 2024

Wales only part of UK to see employment...

August 18, 2022

Less than 10% of Britons think decision to...

May 23, 2023

The UK’s Electric Car Revolution: What You Need...

September 21, 2023

The rise of AI-fuelled data centres set to...

September 23, 2024

    Get free access to all of the retirement secrets and income strategies from our experts! or Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get the Premium Articles Acess for Free

    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Recent Posts

    • Musk feud presents ‘unprecedented’ dynamic compared to past Trump disputes: expert

      June 7, 2025
    • Snub of Musk’s NASA nominee ally preceded sudden ‘big, beautiful bill’ criticism, Trump feud

      June 6, 2025
    • Supreme Court rules DOGE can access Social Security information

      June 6, 2025
    • US sanctions money laundering network aiding Iran as regime faces nuclear reprimand at IAEA

      June 6, 2025
    • From Tariffs to Tech: Where Smart Money’s Moving Right Now

      June 6, 2025
    • Your Weekly Stock Market Snapshot: What It Means for Your Investments

      June 6, 2025

    Categories

    • Business (8,149)
    • Investing (2,019)
    • Politics (15,556)
    • Stocks (3,134)
    • About us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: futureretirementsuccess.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2025 futureretirementsuccess.com | All Rights Reserved