A JUDGE has criticised companies which persist in using small print in contracts with members of the public. Judge James Carroll said the inferences to be drawn from its use in contracts were the worst possible that the object was to deceive.
The court was hearing a case concerning the purchase for commercial use of a Mercedes van, which broke down while transporting equipment for rock groups around Europe.
"It creates an impression of the worst sort, one of a money lending transaction in disguise. The ordinary citizen would get fed up and wouldn't read it [the small print] through," he said.
Judge Carroll was referring in the Circuit Civil Court to the small print in a contract between Mr David Bell, of Newbury Park, Clonshaugh, Dublin, and Equity Bank Ltd, which had provided the finance for the leasing of a van.
"This company is no worse than any of the rest. Shylock himself could not have drawn up a better example," Judge Carroll said.
Judge Carroll said he had his eyes tested three months ago and there could be nothing wrong with his reading glasses. When handed a blown up version of the small print section, he said it was still nothing to write home about.
Mr Bell is suing the Equity Bank, Pembroke Road, Ballsbridge, Dublin, and Annesley (Cloghran) Ltd, Ballybough Road, Fairview, Dublin, for £30,000 damages for negligence, and breach of contract and statutory duty.
He told his counsel, Mr Peter Finlay, that in 1989 he was drawing the dole and the Department of Social Welfare offered him assistance to set up a business through its Back to Work Scheme.
He was able to raise finance through Equity Bank to buy a £28,000 Mercedes 408D van and set himself up in the business of hauling musical instruments and equipment all over Ireland and Europe for An Emotional Fish, Simple Minds and Bagatelle.
He bought the new van in October 1989 and the exhaust fell off in early January 1990. Throughout 1990 he was up and down to Annesley to have "teething problems" sorted out with the vehicle.
He told Mr Finlay that from January 1991, when he went on a tour with groups in Europe, he had a series of major problems with the van, which had always been put right by Annesley under the two year warranty.
The engine seized, leaving him stranded in France, and the cylinder head was replaced three times. Eventually, when the gearbox went in December 1993 and he was faced with a £1,200 bill to fix it, he had to leave the van back at Annesley and go back on the dole.
Included in his claim are bills for airline tickets, towing charges, train fares, van rental costs while his own was being fixed, and phone and fax costs from hotels in Europe to Ireland relating to breakdowns.
Mr Anthony Hunt, counsel for Equity Bank Ltd, said his client had purchased the van from Annesley for the purpose of leasing it to Mr Bell. His company was the financial facilitator and was still owed £13,875, which it claimed in a counter action. If it was held liable in any way to Mr Bell, it would be claiming indemnity from Annesley.
Mr Niall Fitzgibbon, counsel for Annesley (Cloghran) Ltd, said his client was conceding that Mr Bell had been sold a defective vehicle but it had at all times during the period of warranty repaired the van for Mr Bell at no cost to him. While the bank would be entitled to recover from Annesley, it was likely his client would ultimately be entitled to recover from the manufacturer.
He submitted Mr Bell was not entitled to doubly recover costs of hiring other vans and arrears of payments on the van he leased.
Judge Carroll will give his judgment today.