Simmy is a business graduate and running her own construction business. She has seen an advertisement in local newspaper a few weeks before specifying that a big local equipment hiring business (Queen Treasure) offering the building equipment for hiring also claimed to offer $10,000 as compensation if any incident happened due to their equipment. Simmy decided to hire equipment (some ladders and planks to enable) from Queen Treasure based in Melbourne, for her workers to paint the exterior of one of the clients house. When Lang (her worker) collected the hired goods, Langs was asked to sign a hiringagreement. Lang immediately brought this concern into notice of Simmy. Simmy called QueenTreasure and asked why Lang must sign an agreement, the employee of Queen Treasure replied: - "It is just for insurance purposes". Lang did not read the terms and conditions of the agreement, but signed it as requested by the employee of Queen Treasure. Whilst Lang was using the equipment, one of the ladders collapses since the rope that prevents the ladder from collapsing was badly worn and was seriously injured, ladder was broken and walls of the house were damaged. After this incident, Simmy tried to sue the hiring firm for damages, her attention was drawnto a clause on the back of the printed hiring agreement signed by Lang as: - "The owner of hired goods accepts no responsibility for personal injuries or damages suffered by persons using our equipment during the period of hire, irrespective of whether such injuries are caused by breach of contract, negligence or any other cause whatsoever". Simmy contacted you to seek your advice on following matters:

Would your answer be different assuming the advertisement was mere puff under Contract Law? Support your answer with precedents, legal principles, cases and relevant legislation.