In such a situation, and without explicit agreement to the contrary, any person benefiting from an easement must participate in a manner not recommended for maintenance and repair costs. The plaintiff bears the risk even if the defendant`s negligence is a violation of a law. A customer who accepts overnight travel in a vehicle whose light does not work is considered a consent to exempt the defendant from the obligation to comply with the standard provided for by the Protection Act and cannot recover in the event of injury. However, specific laws, such as child labour laws and worker safety laws, protect the claimant from personal inability to protect himself or herself due to reckless judgment or inability to withstand certain pressures. Since the fundamental purpose of these statutes would be thwarted if the applicant could take the risk, it is generally considered that the applicant cannot do so either explicitly or implicitly. An explicit agreement can only relieve the defendant of its liability for negligence if the applicant understands its conditions. If the applicant was not aware of the provision of his contract and a reasonable person in the same position had not been aware of it, it is not binding on the individual and the agreement fails due to lack of mutual consent. The express terms of the agreement shall apply to the particular fault of the defendant. As a general rule, such contracts do not include gross negligence, intentional, wilful or reckless, or conduct that constitutes an intentional act.