-5

A menu lists burgers for £12 and additional "doubling up" patties for £3.50.

Suppose one wants to only prefer a pattie by itself for £3.50 but not a burger.

Is it fair for restaurants to restrict one's food choices in this way under fair contract terms provisions?

Improve this question
1
  • Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    – feetwet ♦
    Commented Oct 23, 2022 at 17:27

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
9

Yes it is legal. There is no law prohibiting such behaviour.

A restaurant menu invites people to ask for items on the menu. People are free to make other offers too, e.g. "no cheese" or "will you add an egg?" or "will you accept £10 for the burger, it's all I have?"

The customer is free to make an offer and the restauranteur is free to accept or refuse the offer. "No I don't want to sell you a burger patty on its own for £3."

Unfair contract terms seem irrelevant because there is no contract at the stage when the customer asks the restauranteur for a food item.

Improve this answer
5

YES

It's a principle in all laws that you can contract with who you want as long as it is not illegal. There is literally no law anywhere that forces anyone to offer every item on a menu to anyone. The restaurant won't contract with you for a pattie unless you also contract for a burger, and buying of the pattie is contingent on buying the burger. Unless you can point out how selling a pattie with a burger but not without is unlawful, it is strictly lawful and legal. As a result, you have neither a leg to stand on with your complaint, nor standing to sue.

Improve this answer
3
  • "unlrss you can point out how it is unlawful it is strictly of lawful and legal." This feels like a rather loaded non answer. Did I presume anywhere that it is unlawful? No, I asked whether it was, and that was the question.
    – JosephCorrectEnglishPronouns
    Commented Oct 22, 2022 at 17:50
  • Not only that but perhaps rereading the question you might notice that I even proposed a way in which it might happen to be illegal. So I would turn around and say: unless you can point out how under the mentioned provisions the described practice is lawful and legal, then it is strictly unlawful.
    – JosephCorrectEnglishPronouns
    Commented Oct 22, 2022 at 17:53
  • 4
    @JosephCorrectEnglishPronouns: In most jurisdictions, everything is legal unless there's a law against it. So it's lawful "by default," and you would instead have to point to a law prohibiting it.
    – Kevin
    Commented Oct 22, 2022 at 20:40

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .