Man Gets $2,600 Because He Wasn’t Able to Watch TV

A man who sued a store for not replacing his faulty TV set can collect “moral damages” to compensate him for the suffering he endured as a result of not being able to watch TV, a judge has ruled.

“In modern life, you cannot deny that a television set, present in almost all homes, is considered an essential good,” ruled the judge in Campos, Brazil, near Rio de Janeiro.

Without a TV, “how can the owner watch the beautiful women on ‘Big Brother’ … or a football game?” the judge asked.

The man was awarded $2,600 against Casas Bahia, the country’s largest home appliance chain.

Source: Reuters.

Image: William Hook via Flickr.