We’ve been highlighting the ridiculous over here at ThinkLegal, and this is no exception. A judge in Brazi has ruled that television is an essential good.
A man in Sao Paulo brought an action against a store for not replacing his broken TV. The judge awarded $2,600 in “moral damages”, that is damages suffered because this man couldn’t watch TV.
"Without it, how can the owner watch the beautiful women on 'Big Brother,' the national news broadcast or a football game," the judge quipped.
It’s an absurd decision. While I understand some of the point of view here, in that TVs are indeed extremely common, there is absolutely no way it can be considered an essential good. Food, shelter, heat, those sort of things all make sense. I would even argue education and water should count. But TV? Hell no.
[Source: Reuters]
No comments:
Post a Comment