• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    47
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Tbf: he renewed this agreement when buying tickets which doesn’t really make it better but still

    Edit: since I got some downvotes and comments, I’m not saying they are in the right, all I’m relativizing is the “years earlier” at the end. The contract was renewed recently, still it totally doesn’t cover this kind of situation.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      56
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      No. That doesn’t make sense either. That was for the park this is their restaurant at their mall off site.

      Edit: the tickets they didn’t survive long enough to actually use either.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      323 months ago

      The restaurant was not in a ticketed park, so the ticket purchase is as related to this as the Disney+ trial.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        33 months ago

        My only point was that it’s more recent than years ago. And I agree that it doesn’t change anything

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      73 months ago

      Contracts can’t really shield from that kind of negligence either though. You can’t have someone sign a contract indemnifying you from everything and then have no culpability when you literally poison them.

      I get that servers have to deal with selective gluten allergies but nut and dairy allergies are not that. They are deadly and the server/kitchen should have absolutely refused to serve any food they couldn’t separate. This is basic knowledge in the food industry too, something they should have known and been trained on.