Big, Broad Smile For The Court!
Who would not feel distraught at being in huge pain because of a normal, hygienic activity that somehow resulted in an inadvertent personal disaster?
As consumers, we trust that the implements we purchase with respected brand names can be trusted to give us good service. A toothbrush, after all, is an innocuous piece of plastic and bristles, meant to polish teeth and remove food particles.
Part of our normal, everyday cleansing activities. In the normal, quotidian upkeep of clean gums and teeth, post-meal.
Who might ever imagine that a well-advertised toothbrush, of all things, might really be something so poorly designed and executed that it would present as a potential hazard when used energetically? You're brushing your teeth, going about a routine method of removing food, ensuring a clean mouth and suddenly the toothbrush becomes a weapon.
This is what happened to Saliha Alnoor of Vancouver. Innocently enough brushing her teeth in the bathroom of her home, when the brush, a product of Colgate-Palmolive Canada broke and stabbed her. "The toothbrush handle broke during brushing and it tore my gums. My gums started bleeding and I experienced excruciating pain."
So much so, poor Ms. Alnoor, that she passed out. Just as well that other family members were close by, and they came to the rescue. To ensure that she "did not swallow and choke and drown in my blood while I was unconscious". Really! Imagine, innocently going about brushing your teeth, disaster strikes and you're dead.
Who might imagine it?
Well, she did. And, as a result she decided she would sue Colgate-Palmolive for maliciously producing an object that had the potential of killing her. Or any innocent using it. She was, she said, in pain "for weeks", poor thing. There was swelling in her mouth. She was unable to eat solid food. She couldn't floss, or brush properly.
The result was she needed special medical treatment and dental implants. "As a result of this ordeal, I lost a lot of weight and I felt really sick and weak". This was in her statement of claim. Against Colgate-Palmolive, citing their Active Angle toothbrush as nothing other than a "killer toothbrush".
"The Active Angle toothbrush suffered from serious mechanical design flaws which were known or ought to have been known by the defendant at all times material to this claim", she asserted. Colgate, for their part, denied any wrong-doing. They would, wouldn't they? Ms. Alnoor felt that Scott Jeffery, Colgate Canada president, should be compelled to attend the courtroom to testify.
Unsurprisingly, he felt otherwise. When Ms. Alnoor and her brother who accompanied her to court, was asked why she was not represented by a lawyer, her brother responded that the first lawyer she hired "began acting strange", and she replaced him, but the second lawyer too failed to make the grade: "... he suggested we drop the claim", at which juncture Ms. Alnoor dismissed him as well.
The presiding judge, Madam Justice Catherine Wedge, seemed rather testy throughout the proceedings. Not at all sympathetic to Ms. Alnoor's plaints. Decidedly unhelpful she was. Justice Wedge was completely disinterested in scrutinizing all the Internet-derived claims of "exploding" toothbrushes and "poisonous" toothpaste.
Leading Ms. Alnoor and her brother to the conclusion that the judge was definitely not on their side. "She is pro-Colgate. She is pro-business. Our supporters warned us this would happen, but we were naive", complained Ms. Alnoor's brother, Abe. Quite scandalous, quite.
A most disappointing outcome for Ms. Alnoor. She was persuaded by this unsympathetic judge that it would be in her best interests to withdraw her complaint against Colgate. For if her claim was dismissed she might be ordered to pay the company's legal costs of roughly $30,000; you know for defending themselves against a nuisance suit.
"We spent $21,000 on lawyers and experts", the Alnoors claimed. "But we have no regrets. Now we know how justice works. Now we are much wiser. I had to do it. I couldn't live with myself if I hadn't."
As consumers, we trust that the implements we purchase with respected brand names can be trusted to give us good service. A toothbrush, after all, is an innocuous piece of plastic and bristles, meant to polish teeth and remove food particles.
Part of our normal, everyday cleansing activities. In the normal, quotidian upkeep of clean gums and teeth, post-meal.
Who might ever imagine that a well-advertised toothbrush, of all things, might really be something so poorly designed and executed that it would present as a potential hazard when used energetically? You're brushing your teeth, going about a routine method of removing food, ensuring a clean mouth and suddenly the toothbrush becomes a weapon.
This is what happened to Saliha Alnoor of Vancouver. Innocently enough brushing her teeth in the bathroom of her home, when the brush, a product of Colgate-Palmolive Canada broke and stabbed her. "The toothbrush handle broke during brushing and it tore my gums. My gums started bleeding and I experienced excruciating pain."
So much so, poor Ms. Alnoor, that she passed out. Just as well that other family members were close by, and they came to the rescue. To ensure that she "did not swallow and choke and drown in my blood while I was unconscious". Really! Imagine, innocently going about brushing your teeth, disaster strikes and you're dead.
Who might imagine it?
Well, she did. And, as a result she decided she would sue Colgate-Palmolive for maliciously producing an object that had the potential of killing her. Or any innocent using it. She was, she said, in pain "for weeks", poor thing. There was swelling in her mouth. She was unable to eat solid food. She couldn't floss, or brush properly.
The result was she needed special medical treatment and dental implants. "As a result of this ordeal, I lost a lot of weight and I felt really sick and weak". This was in her statement of claim. Against Colgate-Palmolive, citing their Active Angle toothbrush as nothing other than a "killer toothbrush".
"The Active Angle toothbrush suffered from serious mechanical design flaws which were known or ought to have been known by the defendant at all times material to this claim", she asserted. Colgate, for their part, denied any wrong-doing. They would, wouldn't they? Ms. Alnoor felt that Scott Jeffery, Colgate Canada president, should be compelled to attend the courtroom to testify.
Unsurprisingly, he felt otherwise. When Ms. Alnoor and her brother who accompanied her to court, was asked why she was not represented by a lawyer, her brother responded that the first lawyer she hired "began acting strange", and she replaced him, but the second lawyer too failed to make the grade: "... he suggested we drop the claim", at which juncture Ms. Alnoor dismissed him as well.
The presiding judge, Madam Justice Catherine Wedge, seemed rather testy throughout the proceedings. Not at all sympathetic to Ms. Alnoor's plaints. Decidedly unhelpful she was. Justice Wedge was completely disinterested in scrutinizing all the Internet-derived claims of "exploding" toothbrushes and "poisonous" toothpaste.
Leading Ms. Alnoor and her brother to the conclusion that the judge was definitely not on their side. "She is pro-Colgate. She is pro-business. Our supporters warned us this would happen, but we were naive", complained Ms. Alnoor's brother, Abe. Quite scandalous, quite.
A most disappointing outcome for Ms. Alnoor. She was persuaded by this unsympathetic judge that it would be in her best interests to withdraw her complaint against Colgate. For if her claim was dismissed she might be ordered to pay the company's legal costs of roughly $30,000; you know for defending themselves against a nuisance suit.
"We spent $21,000 on lawyers and experts", the Alnoors claimed. "But we have no regrets. Now we know how justice works. Now we are much wiser. I had to do it. I couldn't live with myself if I hadn't."
Labels: Human Fallibility, Justice, Life's Like That
posted by Pieface | 7:39 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home