Autistic Man Successfully Sues Gym Who Called Him Stupid

Post Reply New Topic

>> Click here for the story <<

I don't usually rely on Unilad for news, but this is an awesome story.

I bet Virgin Gyms are feeling stupid now!

This is scary.

No free speech laws in the UK?

In the US, we welcome free speech. Especially, when it offends people.

Existing thread about this topic

The endless anti Trump threads and the tactical moderation regarding them tells me otherwise.

This website can make any rule it wants, however, legally, the 1st amendment will supersede those rules.

So, contrary to the above article, this website has no legal recourse action available to it.

Users could say the most God-awful, offensive things, and the law provides no legal recourse (a few exceptions exist), and likewise the 1st amendment would be there if Trump decides to sue this website.

Apparently, that's different in the UK.

I support the claimant's actions, but not for purposes of advocacy. I'm getting to the point, in these discussions, where I am not principled, in respect to freedom of speech or social justice. I am not speaking on behalf of my religion, per se. I just don't like the oafish instructor or business, which employed him. I think it comes down to a personal conflict, and the rest is just details.

I have been singled out, in the real world, when being harmless or guileless. I have seen it happen to other people.

There was no prejudice, based on demographics or personal ability. There was no personality or logistical conflict.

I feel it was the use of free will -- a simple decision, to pick on someone.

I don't feel sorry for the bully, no matter how recourse was taken.

I am not calling it intellectually-honest, or within the spirit of the law. Maybe, he doesn't even have autism. But, I don't care.

Just tell any staff about your disorder and if they call you dumb or stupid, etc. you can sue them but it took this guy two years to do it because he spent that time researching laws to see if he can sue and he was his own lawyer. He won a lawsuit due to discrimination and he had to prove it was discrimination and this was based on his disability.

In the US the same rules apply too when suing. You have to prove.

Spending two years of your life to squeeze £1,400 out of a business that was rude to you doesn't seem like an intelligent use of one's time...

Maybe, it was petty.

So, speaking technically, is there any outward reason why Mr. Aggarwal would be so conspicuously-autistic, as to be unmistakably handicapped.

Even in the United States, engaging in slander or libel is actionable. And, when there is a contractual obligation (like a gym membership), it only makes the results seem hillarious. Sir Richard Branson doesn't like bad press or giving away his money.

Discrimination is an action.

What discriminatory act took place?


Calling someone "stupid" is opinion, not slander.

Opinion is free speech.

Now if he said "Your IQ is below 50", then it would be an factually incorrect statement, not mere opinion, and possibly slander.

Yes, it is his opinion, but it was also intentionally malicious. According to Black's Law Dictionary, slander is "the speaking of false and malicious words concerning another, whereby injury results to his reputation" ( http://thelawdictionary.org/slander/ ). When the individual in question spoke words that were false, malicious and injurious, he committed slander. Slander is actionable in court.

opinion is not false though

the instructor actually believed this autistic guy was acting stupidly

The court decided otherwise.

No it didn't.

The court ruled that calling an ASD person "stupid" is discrimination.