A couple who suffered serious injuries in a crash while in an Uber have been told they cannot sue the firm – because they previously agreed to terms for Uber Eats.
Georgia and John McGinty, from New Jersey, tried to sue the taxi service company in a complaint on 23 February 2023 after an Uber driver “ran a red light and t-boned a vehicle”, according to court documents.
Mrs McGinty needed “numerous surgeries” after suffering cervical and spine fractures, a protruding hernia and injuries to her pelvic floor.
Her husband sustained a fractured sternum and has diminished use in his left wrist, following the crash on 31 March 2022.
However, the Superior Court of New Jersey has ruled terms they agreed to on 8 January 2022 – which the couple said was approved by their daughter while ordering food – are “valid”.
The court highlighted part of the conditions, which states that “incidents or accidents resulting in personal injury to you or anyone else that you allege occurred in connection with your use of services… will be settled by binding individual arbitration between you and Uber, and not in a court of law”.
The ruling added: “We hold that the arbitration provision contained in the agreement under review, which Georgia or her minor daughter, while using her cell phone agreed to, is valid and enforceable.”
Arbitration allows people to settle disputes without going to court and generally involves a neutral arbitrator who reviews arguments before making a binding decision.
Mr and Mrs McGinty may appeal against the decision to the state’s Supreme Court, their lawyers suggested to Law&Crime, a US-based news publication.
Advertisement
In a statement to the same website, the couple said: “We are horrified at what the court’s decision suggests: A large corporation like Uber can avoid being sued in a court of law by injured consumers because of contractual language buried in a dozen-page-long user agreement concerning services unrelated to the one that caused the consumers’ injuries.”
They added: “Here, the content, format, and presentation – dozens of pages on an iPhone screen during a food delivery order – make it impossible that anyone could understand what rights they were potentially waiving or how drastic the consequences could be.”
Law&Crime reports Uber said the court “concluded that on multiple occasions the plaintiff herself – not her teenage daughter – agreed to Uber’s Terms of Use, including the arbitration agreement”.
The case is reminiscent of Disney’s recent bid to throw out a wrongful death claim because the accuser signed up for a one-month trial of its streaming service Disney+.
Disney said the first page of its subscriber agreement states “any dispute between You and Us… is subject to a class action waiver and must be resolved by individual binding arbitration”.
Russia’s investment envoy has said research into the feasibility of a tunnel joining the US and Russia started “six months ago”.
Kirill Dmitriev first posted about the idea on Thursday, suggesting a “Putin-Trump” rail tunnel could connect the two countries under the Bering Strait, which separates Russia‘s vast and sparsely populated Chukotka region from Alaska.
Asked about the idea during a press conference with Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Friday, Donald Trump called it “interesting”.
He also asked President Zelenskyy what he made of it, to which Mr Zelenskyy replied: “I’m not happy with this idea.”
This prompted laughter from the US side.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:49
What happened at the Trump-Zelenskyy meeting?
Overnight, Mr Dmitriev posted on X, saying: “We have started the feasibility study of the Russia-Alaska tunnel six months ago.
“Russian Direct Investment Fund with partners financed on a commercial basis the first ever railroad bridge between Russia and China.
“The bridge reduced cargo route by more than 700 kilometres,” he said.
He directed a post on X towards Elon Musk, suggesting the tunnel could be dug by the billionaire’s construction firm, Boring Company.
Image: Graphic of the proposed project. Pic: Kirill Dmitriev
“The dream of a US-Russia link via the Bering Strait reflects an enduring vision – from the 1904 Siberia-Alaska railway to Russia’s 2007 plan,” Mr Dmitriev wrote.
“RDIF has studied existing proposals, including the US-Canada-Russia-China railroad, and will support the most viable.
“Imagine connecting the US and Russia, the Americas and the Afro-Eurasia with the Putin-Trump Tunnel – a 70-mile link symbolizing unity.”
Volodymyr Zelenskyy has not ruled out the possibility that he can secure long-range Tomahawk missiles from the US, adding that he believes “Putin is afraid” of the consequences.
“It’s good that President Trump didn’t say ‘no’, but for today, didn’t say ‘yes’,” he said about the supply of the missiles, as part of a discussion which will air on Sunday.
He admitted the US president was concerned about a potential escalation with Russia, but Mr Zelenskyy told NBC, Sky News’s US partner, that the weapons are a genuine concern for Vladimir Putin.
“I think that Putin [is] afraid that United States will deliver us Tomahawks. And I think that he [is] really afraid that we will use them,” he said.
Image: Volodymyr Zelenskyy still hopes the US will supply Tomahawks. Pic: Meet the Press/NBC News
The weapons have a significantly longer range than any other missiles in Ukraine’s armoury and have the potential to be a game-changer in the war against Russia.
More on Russia
Related Topics:
While Mr Trump did not rule out providing the Tomahawk missiles, he appeared cool to the prospect as he looked ahead to a meeting with the Russian president in Hungary in the coming weeks.
‘US doesn’t want escalation’
Following the meeting with Mr Trump, who held a phone call with Mr Putin on Thursday, Mr Zelenskyy told reporters: “We spoke about long-range (missiles) of course. And I do not want to make statements about it.”
But he added: “We don’t speak about it because… United States doesn’t want this escalation”.
Image: Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s plans to secure new missiles had worried Russia. Pic: Reuters
Later in a post on X, Mr Zelenskyy said he was counting on President Trump to “bring this war closer to an end”.
“We discussed all key issues – our positions on the battlefield, long-range capabilities and air defence, and, of course, diplomatic prospects,” he said.
“Russia must end the aggression it started and continues to deliberately prolong. We count on the United States’ pressure.”
In a roundtable with journalists following the meeting, Mr Trump confirmed that hitting targets deep inside Russian territory would be an “escalation”.
Image: Donald Trump said hitting targets deep inside Russian territory would be an ‘escalation’. Pic: Reuters
He also said he was hesitant to tap into the US’ supply of Tomahawks, saying: “I have an obligation also to make sure that we’re completely stocked up as a country, because you never know what’s going to happen in war and peace.
“We’d much rather have them not need Tomahawks. We’d much rather have the war be over to be honest.”
Analysis: Is Trump being ‘played’ by Putin?
Before Donald Trump met with Volodymyr Zelenskyy, he hosted one of his favourite singers, Andrea Bocelli, in the Oval Office.
The Italian tenor serenaded him with the signature track Time To Say Goodbye, a song about hope and new beginnings.
But the next event on his agenda suggested antipathy between Trump and the Ukrainian president are firmly lodged in the past.
On the key issue of whether Vladimir Putin actually wants peace, the pair continue to fundamentally disagree.
Trump repeated several times his belief that Putin is committed to ending the war, which may come as a surprise to the people of eastern Ukraine, being pummeled by an expanded Russian offensive in the past few months.
Trump also spoke about “bad blood on both sides”, again inferring equal blame on Zelenskyy, whose sovereign nation was invaded, and Putin, who is doing the invading.
It’s in Putin’s gift to stop the fighting immediately, but that was glossed over.
Following Friday’s meeting at the White House, UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer confirmed he had called Mr Zelenskyy to reiterate his support.
Ukraine has UK’s ‘resolute support’
A Downing Street spokesperson said: “The prime minister spoke to the president of Ukraine, European leaders and the NATO secretary general this evening following President Zelenskyy’s visit to the White House today.
“The leaders reiterated their unwavering commitment to Ukraine in the face of ongoing Russian aggression. A just and lasting peace for Ukraine was the only way to stop the killing for good, they agreed.
“Further discussions about how they could support Ukraine in the lead up to, and following, a ceasefire would continue this week, including in a Coalition of the Willing call on Friday, the leaders agreed.
“Following the call with world leaders this evening, the prime minister then spoke to President Zelenskyy bilaterally to underscore the United Kingdom’s resolute support for Ukraine.”
Trump also spoke about “bad blood on both sides”, again inferring equal blame on Zelenskyy, whose sovereign nation was invaded, and Putin, who is doing the invading.
It’s in Putin’s gift to stop the fighting immediately, but that was glossed over.
More on Donald Trump
Related Topics:
Zelenskyy, clearly contorted by a need to put the record straight but not anger the famously mercurial man on the other side of the table, fired back that it is the Ukrainians who are committed to a ceasefire, a trilateral meeting and ultimately, an end to this war.
Relations between Zelenskyy and Trump have, obviously, improved from February when the Ukrainian president was berated and left the White House early.
On that occasion, he was mocked for wearing a T-shirt and so, the next two visits, he has sported an all black suit. He has also learned that Trump responds to flattery and, accordingly, he peppered the president with compliments.
Image: Zelenskyy, pictured following his meeting with Trump, has learned that the president responds to flattery. Pic: AP
He credited him with “managing the ceasefire in the Middle East”, and said he believes he has a “chance” to do the same in Ukraine.
That much could be gleaned from his Truth Social post after the meeting, which implored Putin and Zelenskyy to end the war along its current lines. “Let both claim Victory, let History decide!” he wrote.
As recently as Sunday, he was threatening to send long-range Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine but he made clear after their meeting that he wouldn’t be doing that right now. It’s likely he will wait until at least after his trailed meeting with Putin in Budapest.
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
The US president went in with two aims: to broker a ceasefire and a one-on-one meeting between Putin and Zelenskyy. He left with neither and there is no public sign that Putin has shifted from his maximalist aims in Ukraine.
Image: Trump greets Putin on the red carpet in Alaska in August. Pic: AP
Yet he seems determined to take the Russian president at his word, granting him first a phone call ahead of the Zelenskyy visit to Washington DC and now another meeting.
Putin was first successful in getting Trump to hold off on more severe sanctions on Russia, which were crippling economically. Now he has, seemingly, played a role in persuading Trump to hold off on sending Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine.
The US president was asked by a journalist whether it was possible he was being played by Putin. He admitted it was possible but said he usually comes out of these things pretty well. Time will tell.