Disney’s arguments have been labelled ‘preposterous’
Disney World has argued that a man cannot sue for the death of his wife because of terms he signed up to in a free trial of Disney+.
Jeffrey Piccolo’s wife died in 2023 from a severe allergic reaction after eating at a restaurant at the theme park.
Piccolo filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Disney, however, the company argues its terms of use, which Piccolo agreed to when creating his Disney account in 2019, means they have to settle out of court.
Piccolo alleges that the restaurant at Disney World in Orlando, Florida, did not take enough care over here severe allergies to dairy and nuts, despite being told several times about them.
Dr Kanokporn Tangsuan died in hospital on 5 October 2023, just hours after they had dined at the restaurant.
Her death was confirmed by a medical examiner ‘as a result of anaphylaxis due to elevated levels of dairy and nut in her system’.
Piccolo is suing Disney for a sum more than $50,000 plus legal fees.
Disney is keen for the case in the courts to be halted and for the dispute to be settled out of court in a process called arbitration.
The company argues that it cannot be taken to court because in its terms of use, it says users agree to settle any disputes with the company via arbitration.
Piccolo reportedly signed up to a one month free trial of Disney+ in 2019 and agreed to the terms of use. Disney say he agreed to the terms again when he used his Disney account to buy tickets for the theme park in 2023.
However, lawyers for Mr Piccolo have slammed the entertainment company saying their arguments are ‘preposterous’ and ‘inane’.
They say Disney’s case ‘is based on the incredible argument that any person who signs up for a Disney+ account, even free trials that are not extended beyond the trial period, will have forever waived the right to a jury trial’.
The legal filing says that the argument that these terms can be extended to wrongful death or personal injury claims ‘border on the surreal’.
Ernest Aduwa, partner at Stokoe Partnership Solicitors, who are not involved in the proceedings commented that Disney are ‘pushing the envelope of contract law’.
He said: “The courts will have to consider, on balance, if the arbitration clause in a contract for a streaming service can really be applied to as serious an allegation of wrongful death through negligence at a theme park.
“Disney’s argument that accepting their terms and conditions for one product covers all interactions with that company is novel and potentially far reaching.”
Disney’s motion to take the case out of court and decided by arbitration will be heard in front of a Florida judge in October.
