In Blundon V

In Blundon v. Ashton Pools, the plaintiff sued the defendant after discovering cracks in the patio that surrounded the pool the defendant had installed for them. The defendant claimed that the exemption clause in the contract excused them from liability. What properly described the outcome in this case?

A) The exemption clause protected Ashton Pools because of the principle of "freedom to contract".
B) The exemption clause protected Ashton Pools because Blundon was made aware of the clause prior to signing the contract.
C) The exemption clause did not protect Ashton Pools because it was an illegal restraint of trade.
D) The exemption clause was not applied as the damage was not an Act of God and Ashton Pools failed to bring the clause to the attention of Blundon.
E) The exemption clause was not applied as it did not pertain to the damage that was caused.