here is the question:

Identify the exemption clause in the scenario and apply the legal rules under the four (4) points relating to the enforceability of an exemption clause to analyse whether the exemption clause is valid and enforceable by Caf Happi against Charlie in relation to his claims for (i) his wrist injury, and (ii) his damaged watch.

"Clause 5: All guests must take care of their own well-being and personal belongings on our premises.

Clause 6: The management will not be liable or responsible for any bodily injury, or any loss, theft or damage to your personal belongings."

since we already know:

Due to his ecstatic mood, Charlie did not notice a puddle of water on the floor near the caf's exit (which is still within the caf's premises) and which had not been mopped up by the caf staff despite being there for some time. and he got wrist injury and damage his watch.

Caf Happi happens to be Charlie's favourite caf, and he often visits their website to find out about the latest promotion.

When he called them, he was informed by the caf manager that Caf Happi's website clearly provided a list of terms and conditions.

Charlie is aware of these clauses as he had previously seen them when he visited the website of Caf Happi.

I am confused now coz he alr saw the clauses . i am not sure the 2 clauses still valid or not.

thanks