Consumer Protection Laws and Contract Law: A Case Study of Heidi
Verified
Added on  2023/02/01
|7
|2363
|33
AI Summary
This case study explores the application of consumer protection laws and contract law in a series of issues faced by Heidi. It examines misleading advertisements, verbal contracts, and faulty products, providing insights into the relevant laws and their implications.
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.
Assignment: Due date Date Submitted Tutor
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
Answer to Question A (1) Issue ï‚·Protection of consumers from misleading advertisements. Heidi was misled Machine Express Pty a coffee machine selling at her local industrial1. Through an outdoor sign advertisement, the store claimed to be selling NewBean Coffee Machine at discounted half price. ï‚·There are two issues involved in the first case between Heidi and Machine Express Pty Ltd. The first issue is that Machine Express Pty provided misleading advertisement that was deceptive to Heidi at their coffee shop. ï‚·The sign outside Machine Express Pty advertised that NewBean Coffee Machine was being sold at half price which was not the case and deceptive. ï‚·The second case in the first issue was that Machine Express Pty Ltd failed to honor their verbal contract to Heidi and sold a premium NewBean Coffee Machine she had identified. Rule ï‚·2According to the 2010 Australian Consumer Laws Act consumers like Heidi are protected from unfair marketing and advertisement campaigns3. The law prohibits businesses from providing misleading and false information .This includes information provided on the seller's websites, electronic media, online applications, and shop front advertisements. The advertisement by Machine Express Pty was in front of their shop. ï‚·The law also prohibits businesses from giving offers that cannot be substantiated .These offers include discounts or after sells services. Machine Express Pty had promised to give half-price discounts on the NewBean Coffee Machines which the store attendant said they were not obliged to offer to their customers. Application 1Allen, H. J. (2015). Financial Stability Regulation as Indirect Investor/Consumer Protection Regulation: Implications for Regulatory Mandates and Structure.Tul. L. Rev.,90, 1113. 22010 Australian Consumer Laws Act 3Bailey, I. H., Bell, M., & Bell, C. (2011).Construction law in Australia. Lawbook Company. Page2of7
To understand how The Consumer Protection Law is applicable, this issue will focus on Section 18 of The Consumer Law. This law prohibits businesses that sell goods and services from providing information that contradict the principles of fair trade. Most of the unfair trade practices that are in this law are geared towards making the businesses profitable at either the expense of their competitors or the buyers. Section 33 of the Australian Consumer Protection Law warns business against misleading the public in advertisements and marketing campaigns. Reckitt Benckiser v Procter and Gamble 2015 The case of Reckitt Benckiser against Procter and Gamble in 2015 provided a good example of how the law is applied regarding misleading advertisement.4The plaintiff, in this case, Reckitt Benckiser accused the defendants Procter and Gamble of airing a television advertisement that was misleading to the public regarding their products. The other case was that Procter and Gamble had displayed in supermarket shopping shelves that their products were better than the ones for the plaintiff. The court through Judge Lee ordered the defendant to comply with Sections 18 and 33 of the Competition and Consumer Protection Laws of 2010 and practice fair trading completion. The court also found that the consumers were being deceived in both advertisements. Fair trade practices dictate that no direct attacks are allowed another business. Conclusion The Consumer Protection Law Section 18 and 33 applies to Heidi’s case.5The court applied the law based on the facts and evidence of the case. The evidence was found to be scientifically compelling that the products by the plaintiff were of the same quality as the ones for the defendants.6The same law will also apply in the case of Heidi. The coffee machine supplier Machine Express Pty Ltd broke the law by providing false advertisement. It will be upon the court to determine if the fines will be paid to Heidi or the government. In most cases, the fine is usually paid to the government. Answer to Question A (2) Issue The main issue in this case is in regard to contract law. 4Reckitt Benckiser v Procter and Gamble 2015 5Frank, I. (Eds.).( 2010) Framing regulation of fast food advertising in the Australian print media.Social science & medicine,69(9), 1402-1408. 6The Consumer Protection Law Section 18 and 33 Page3of7
Machine Express Pty Ltd had promised to sell to Heidi the white premium model NewBean but later sold it to another customer. Are verbal contracts legally binding? The shop attendant at Machine Express Pty Ltd had promised to sell to Heidi the NewBean machine but later negated on the promise. Rule The law in Australia recognizes verbal agreements to be legally binding. The law recognizes and allows for verbal contracts in the second issue of Machine Express Pty Ltd shop attendant not honoring the agreement they had with Heidi. There are exceptions to the legality of verbal contracts in which buying of the coffee machine is not applicable. Contracts that involve large amounts of money like mortgages and automobiles are the ones that the law requires written consent and contracts. Application The Application of the second case in the first issue dealing with the contract between Heidi and Machine Express Pty Ltd relates to the application of contract law. The law recognizes verbal contracts and in this particular case, the law will be applicable. The main challenge in the application of this law is in proving the evidence .With no written evidence the defendant can simply deny having said anything. Yulema Pty v Simons 2009 This case relates to an unwritten agreement between individuals who owned shares in group investments.7Yulema had accused Simons of not honoring a 2009 agreement in which they had agreed to buy shares and derive interests from ECB Group of companies. The matter was complicated further because there was no written evidence to the agreement at that particular time .One the plaintiff’s witness had died and there was no way the court could have heard his evidence. Conclusion 7Case Yulema Pty v Simons 2009 Page4of7
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
The ruling of Yulema v Simons is also applicable to Heidi’s case. The court ruled that the accused that had negated on their part of the verbal agreement be compelled to pay the plaintiff and honor the verbal contract of 2009. The same application of the law should also apply to the case of Heidi against Machine Express Pty Ltd. The coffee selling store should be made to respect the agreement they made to Heidi and pay for both time and resources lost Heidi. Answer to Question B Issue The second part of this assignment will delve into establishing if there was a binding contract between Heidi and her manager Gertrude at her initial place of work Caffeine Stop Pty Ltd. The manager Gertrude is accused to have violated an agreement she had made to sell to Heidi one of the machines at Caffeine Stop Pty Ltd that they were not using . Rule The Australian law recognizes a contract to be composed of an offer and acceptance. 8Both of these components were present in the agreement between Heidi and Gertrude. The law recognizes the free agreement between two parties in a financial transaction to be legally binding even without written consent. The basis of the Australian contract law is based on the common law and the English law with modifications having being made over the years according to different judgments. Application Pharmaceutical Society of Britain v Boots Chemist 1952 9This case explains the application of contract law according to Section 2 (d) of the 1980 Contracts Act. This act demands a contract to either have a verbal or written offer of good or services and terms of acceptance. The case of The Pharmaceutical Society of Britain against Boots Chemist represents how the different components of contracts are applicable. The 8Hunt, K. M. (2015). Gaming the system: Fake online reviews v. consumer law.Computer Law & Security Review,31(1), 3-25. 9Pharmaceutical Society of Britain v Boots Chemist 1952 Page5of7
pharmacists union had sued Boots Chemist for engaging in unethical practices while selling drugs to customers over the counter. The chemist argued that the drugs were only being used as invitations for customers to see and then be sold by a qualified pharmacist. The chemist also argued that it did not have any written or verbal agreement with the buyers. The court found Boots Chemist to have contravened both the Pharmacists Board Regulations and The Contract Act.10This case can be applied to the case of Heidi and Gertrude. The evidence points to the fact that Gertrude breached the contract she had with Heidi according to The Contract Act. Conclusion The actions by the manager of Caffeine Stop Pty Ltd Gertrude towards Heidi were driven by greed that resulted in breaking the law.11Businesses work on the basis of willing buyer willing seller principle. While Heidi had already agreed to be a willing buyer it was the responsibility of Gertrude to respect the contract they had.12The fact that Gertrude wanted to see how much the Caffeine Stop Pty Ltd coffee machine would fetch online while she had agreed to sell to Heidi was wrong. Answer to question C Issue ï‚·Heidi bought a faulty GreenBean machine from Coffee Supplies Fast Pty Ltd after being frustrated in her first two attempts to buy the machine. ï‚·The faulty machine broke down on the first day of Heidi opening her new coffee shop called Roast the Day Away. ï‚·This made her close the coffee shop while she suffered financial losses through the loss of customers for a whole week. The other financial setback she suffered was when one of her main investor's called Tate withdrew her financial from Roast the Day Away because she found it closed on the third day from its opening. Rule 10Mulligan, K. (2010). Emotions and values. InThe Oxford handbook of philosophy of emotion. 11Veljanovski, C. (2010). Economic approaches to regulation. InThe Oxford Handbook of Regulation. 12Wei, S. (2015). Wealth Management Products in the Context of China's Shadow Banking: Systemic Risks, Consumer Protection, and Regulatory Instruments.Asia Pacific Law Review,23(1), 91-123. Page6of7
The Consumer Laws of Australia protects consumers like Heidi from suppliers like Coffee Supplies Fast Pty Ltd who sold her the faulty NewBean coffee machine . The law guarantees automatic warranty that when a buyer buys goods like electronics or machines, they are meant to function.13The law gives consumers the right to return the faulty NewBean coffee machine to Coffee Supplies Fast Pty Ltd. She can also demand the machine to be repaired. About losing her customers and business partner due to the faulty machine, Heidi’s claim to Coffee Supplies Fast Pty Ltd will depend if the fault was intentional or a genuine mechanical fault for her to claim compensation for the business lost. Application Brown v Ireland Motor Sports Association (1972) 14This case represents a similar case of Heidi against Coffee Supplies Fast Pty Lt.15Mr. Brown sued the Ireland Motor Sports Association for selling to him a faulty race car to compete in 1970. The car broke down and made him lose the race. After investigations, the court ruled against Mr. Brown and asserted that the damage to his car was a genuine mechanical problem that had no ill intentions. The sports association was made to repair the car.16The same principle will apply to the case of Heidi and Coffee Supplies Fast Pty, the coffee selling company will be compelled to refund, repair or provide Heidi with another machine. About compensation for business lost it will be upon the discretion of the court and investigation authorities if the faulty coffee machine was a genuine mechanical fault or an act of sabotage to Heidi coffee business. The results of the investigations will form the basis for compensation on business lost during the one week the coffee shop was closed. Conclusion The Consumer Protection Act shields customers from loses caused by unfair business practices. The aim of both The Contract Law and Consumer Protection Law safeguard the interests of both the seller and the buyer. This assignment using Heidi’s case has defined, interpreted and applied both consumer laws and contract laws in the three different cases in advising Heidi legal choices. 13Svantesson, D., & Clarke, R. (2010). Privacy and consumer risks in cloud computing.Computer law & security review,26(4), 391-397. 14Brown v Ireland Motor Sports Association (1972) 15Schwenzer, I., Hachem, P., & Kee, C. (2012).Global sales and contract law. Oxford University Press. 16Kolivos, E., & Kuperman, A. (2012). Consumer law: Web of lies-legal implications ofastroturfing.Keeping good companies,64(1), 38. Page7of7