logo

Business Law and Ethics - PDF

   

Added on  2021-05-27

12 Pages2744 Words54 Views
 | 
 | 
 | 
Running head: BUSINESS LAW AND ETHICSAustralian Consumer LawName of the StudentName of the UniversityAuthor Note
Business Law and Ethics - PDF_1

1BUSINESS LAW AND ETHICSAnswer to question 1Issue:The main issue of the case is to determine whether all the transaction made by Sangitafalls under the purview of Australian Consumer Law or not.Rule:The subject matter of the case is based on the general principle of Australian ConsumerLaw. Provisions on Australian Consumer Law have been engraved under schedule 2 ofCompetition and Consumer Act 2010. According to section 2 of the Act, the main object of theAct is to protect the interest of the consumers by promoting the fair trade practice. AustralianConsumer Law has defined the term “consumer” as any person who has bought goods priced notmore than $40,000 or bought goods for personal or domestic use. Further, the AustralianConsumer Law secures the rights of the consumers. According to the consumer law, when aconsumer buys certain goods, it will come under the purview of guarantee automatically (Brodyand Temple 2016.). The product should be safe, without any fault, acceptable and expectedmaterials. Further, it has been stated that proper care should be taken during delivery of thegoods. Further, it has been observed that every company is liable to supply reasonable goods tothe consumers. There should be no dispute from their part. In ACCC v TPG Internet Pty Ltd[2013] HCA 54, it has been held that in case of a deceptive act, the supplier or the company willbe held liable. In such case, the acts of the company will attract the provision of section 52 ofUnfair Trade Practice Act 1974 (Cth).
Business Law and Ethics - PDF_2

2BUSINESS LAW AND ETHICSApplication:In this case, it has been observed that Sangita has made many order from the online storeof Myers and placed certain orders for her domestic use. However, it has been observed certaindisputes have been arisen in this case. First dispute arise in case of the rice cooker. It has beenfound that wrong material has been served in the place of the rice cooker. Further, disputes havealso been observed in the case of electric that has been ordered by her. It has been observed thatthe drilling machine has not been worked properly. Last dispute has been observed in the case ofelectric toothbrush. In this case, Sangita had a discussion with the online expert who had assuredher that the product could be work with battery, but when the same has been delivered, it hasfound that there is no option but the main charge. There are certain grounds that can assure that Australian Consumer Law will be applying on thiscase. first, Sangita comes under the definition of consumer, as she placed offer regarding all thegoods for domestic use and each of them priced lower that $40,000. Further, according to TPGInternet’s case it can be stated that all the products were defective and she can claim for replaceor refund regarding the disputed goods.Conclusion:It can, therefore be stated that transaction made by Sangita falls under the purview ofAustralian Consumer Law.Answer to question 2Issue:The main issue of the case is to determine what are the implied guarantees could Sangitaargued have been breached by the stores.
Business Law and Ethics - PDF_3

3BUSINESS LAW AND ETHICSRule:The present subject matter of the case is based on the provisions of Australian ConsumerLaw. According to Section 51 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, there are certainimplied guarantees that imposed on the consumers (Howells and Weatherill 2017). However,there are certain essentials that should be met for proper application of the implied guarantee.According to the first principle, a buyer should enjoy the goods without all encumbrances.Further, it has been required that no one should have an undisclosed interest over the goods(Taylor and McNamara 2014). In case if any deceptive or misleading act has been done in thepart of the supplier or the manufacturer, it will be invalid in nature and the matter could be takento the Federal Circuit Court (Corones, Christensen and Howell 2016). When the consumers havepurchased goods, it assumes that he has entered into a contract with the company and therefore,no misstatement or deceptive activities should be done on the part of the supplier. In case of anywrong thing supply, the affected party should have to inform the Australian Competition andConsumer Commission (ACCC) at the first glance. In case of any deceptive act on the part of thesupplier, it will come under section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law (Alexander 2016). Inthis case, proof regarding the intention of the parties regarding the matter is not required. Further,according to the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), suppliers should not take any illegaladvantage from the consumer (Sims 2016). He should have to serve all the goods in good faith.In case of any adverse situation, the consumer can apply their implied guarantees. Theapplication of these guarantees is depending on the way of working capabilities of the suppliers.If all the duties have been done in good faith, the question of implied guarantees will not crop up(North and Flitcroft 2016). However, if the goods are served in proper way and in goodcondition, it will be regarded as per the terms of the Australian Consumer Law. In case of any
Business Law and Ethics - PDF_4

End of preview

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

Related Documents
Understanding Australian Consumer Law and Implied Consumer Guarantees
|8
|2333
|81

Business Ethics and law Assignment PDF
|7
|2267
|151

Business Law and Ethics: ACL and Consumer Guarantees
|12
|2670
|71

Australian Consumer Law: Case Study Analysis
|12
|2670
|467

Consumer Classification and Implied Guarantees under Australian Consumer Law
|7
|2388
|54

Introduction of Australian Consumer Law
|9
|2614
|180