What do you think about the outcome of this legal case where the plaintiff sued a tour company?

Question

The law suit was lauched in Canada against a tour company that offered in its brochures, apart from glossy photographs taken under ideal conditions, a lot of "gemutlichkeit" to tourists who booked their trip to Switzerland.

"Gemutlichkeit" is defined in the Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English as "cheerfulness, cosiness, geniality", and is, as it sounds, derived from German.

It turned out that the tourist did not have a very good time on his trip to Switzerland, and did not encounter any of the above conditions while his was in the region . He therefore tried to sue the travel company and have his money refunded to him. The tourist claimed he did not get his gemutlichkeit while he was in Switzerland and that had expected a lot more.

The judge, in the course of his judgement, referred to the tourist as "naïve". He also commented that "whatever gemutlichkeit is supposed to be, he didn't get it", and awarded the plaintiff a ridiculous sum of money in damages. I think it was one cent (Canadian). Technically, however, the tourist had won his case.

Do you agree that the tourist should have been more realistic, and do you think he should have won his case at all?

Answer 1

No.  That type of advertising is usually termed "puffery" as it is entirely subjective and not capable of proof.  Another example from an older case, in which the car seller advertised that the seats were "rich leather."  The richness is entirely subjective and not capable of objective proof or objective performance and so generally those claims are dismissed before they ever get before a judge.  I am guessing in this case that the causes was heard by a lower court judge who gave it all of 2 seconds though.  Had he extended that to 10 seconds, judgment would have been for the defendant.  

Answer 2

.   It's cute.  A waste of the court's time, tho.