West was 17 years of age & obtained his driver's license. He went to Drive-Yourself Ltd., showed his license, and signed for the hiring of a car. The Drive-Yourself clerk did not notice West's age as being under 18, the minimum age required by the firm to agree to hire. The contract contained clauses requiring the hirer to observe all laws regulating the use of motor vehicles, not to enter the car in any competition, to indemnify the hiring company for any fines imposed in respect of the operation of the automobile, and to return it in good condition. West then gathered up 7 friends & took them for a drive. While attempting to pass another car at 20 km/h above the speed limit, he lost control and wrecked the car against a stump. At the time there were 3 passengers in the front seat in addition to West, the driver. Drive-Yourself Ltd. Brought an action against West for the value of the wrecked car. What scope, if any, would the plaintiff company have for countering West's defense of infancy? indicate with reasons whether its action is likely to succeed.
The question belongs to Law and it discusses about a minor hired a car from a car hire company. He drove the car and wrecked it by slamming it against a stump. The car hire company wants to sue the minor. Suggestions for the company are to be given.
Total Word Count 209