Australian Consumer Law (ACL) Assignment

8 Pages1422 Words97 Views

Added on  2020-03-23

Australian Consumer Law (ACL) Assignment

   Added on 2020-03-23

ShareRelated Documents
Running Head: Law 1Law
Australian Consumer Law (ACL) Assignment_1
Law2Answer aIssue:Whether Chong is a consumer under Australian Consumer Law (ACL)?Law:Section 3 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010- schedule 2 states, person acquired goods as consumer if amount paid for such goods did not exceed $40000. However, this rule has exception also which is stated under clause 2 of this section. As per clause 2 of this section, provision stated under subsection 1 is not applied if person acquired the goods or held himself out as acquiring the goods:For re-supplying the goods acquired by the person.For using the acquired goods or transforming the goods in trade or commerce:For the purpose of production and manufacturer.For the purpose of treating or repairing the other goods and fixtures on land.Application:In the present case, Chong purchased the goods for the purpose of his construction business, which falls under clause 2 of section 3. Therefore, Chong can be treated as the consumer of Jason.Conclusion:Chong is the consumer as per section 3 of the Act.Answer b
Australian Consumer Law (ACL) Assignment_2
Law3Issue:Whether Jason breaches any law by advertising the used truck as brand new?Law: Section 29 of the Act states that, any person while conducting activities in trade and commerce must not made any false representation related to the supply or possible supply of goods and services or while promoting the supply or use of the goods and services. This section states various factors which must not be falsely represented by the person, such as clause c of this section states that person must not make false representation that goods are new.Application:In the present case, while publishing the advertisement related to the truck that truck is brand new but in actual truck was not new. This can be understood through case law Trade Practices Commission v Pacific Dunlop Ltd [1994] FCA 1043 (22 April 1994). In this case, trader sold the socks by stating that socks are made from pure cotton, but in actual socks were not made from pure cotton. In this Court held that trader breach section 29 of the Act. Therefore, Jason breach section 29 of the Act because he made false representation related to the truck. Conclusion:
Australian Consumer Law (ACL) Assignment_3

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Related Documents
CLWM4000 Business & Corporations Law

Business & Corporations Law Assignment

Is Chong a consumer under the Australian Consumer Law?

Business and Corporate Law Name of the University Author

Contract Law: Remedies under Australian Consumer Law

Business Law: Australian Consumer Law Guarantees and Remedies