University Consumer Law Assignment: Problem Question Analysis
VerifiedAdded on 2022/10/12
|8
|1155
|20
Homework Assignment
AI Summary
This assignment analyzes two problem questions related to Australian Consumer Law (ACL). The first question examines a breach of section 18 of the ACL, focusing on misleading and deceptive conduct by a restaurant owner, Kristof, who misrepresented the sourcing of his food. The analysis applies relevant case law, including *Parkdale Custom Built Furniture Pty Ltd v Puxu Pty Ltd*, *ACCC v TPG Internet Pty Ltd*, and *ACCC v Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Limited*, to conclude that Kristof's actions were misleading. The second problem question explores whether Adam can take action against 'Vultures Inc' and Edward under the ACL, specifically addressing unconscionable conduct. The analysis references sections 20, 21, 22, and 23 of the ACL, alongside cases such as *Qantas Airways Ltd v Cameron*, *ACCC v Samton Holdings Pty Ltd*, and *ACCC v Lelee Pty Ltd*, to determine that Edward and Vultures Inc engaged in unconscionable conduct, particularly in their employment services, and that the contract with Adam is void.
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.
1 out of 8