Alfonse has started his own container transport business. He owns a semi-trailer truck to deliver shipping containers to businesses around Adelaide. He has used the truck loading bay at Port Harbour, owned and operated by PH Pty Ltd (PH), on two previous occasions. There is a large visible sign by the entrance gate that states in bold font: 'PH Pty Ltd assumes no responsibility for theft of or damage to any vehicles parked in the loading area. Users park at their own risk.' He has never bothered to read the sign. On Wednesday, Alfonse drives up to the gate and enters the loading bay without reading the sign. He parks his truck and walks to have some lunch at a near-by cafe as the container he is picking up is not yet ready for him. An hour later, whilst Alfonse is still away enjoying some lunch, a prison escapee from the prison nearby enters the loading bay. Smashing the driver's seat window, the prison escapee breaks in to Alfonse's vehicle and steals $1000 cash and a watch worth $800 from the glove box of the truck. When Alfonse returns from lunch he notices the smashed glass and realises that his car has been broken into. He is extremely upset about the loss of the cash and the watch-the items were going to be a birthday present for his girlfriend Winrey. He demands that PH compensate him for the damage caused to his vehicle (the broken window) and the stolen items. PH respond by saying: 'We are sorry for your loss but we are not liable. We have contracted on the basis that you enter the loading bay at your own risk'. Advise Alfonse on whether the exclusion clause is part of the contract. Note: You DO NOT need to interpret whether the exclusion clause protects PH, only consider if it is part of the contract. Make reference to relevant case law. Answer this problem question using the IRAC method taught in class.