Australian Consumer Law

Question: Case study Topic Australian Consumer Law Answer: Introduction Consumer laws forms the basis upon which fair trade and rights of the consumers are upheld. These laws are enacted by the government or the legal authority so as to protect the interests of the consumers and imbibe certain protocols connected to fair trade, eschew fraudulent activities and promote competitiveness within the business sector. Alike other nations Australia too has its own share of laws enacted for the protection of the consumers and fair trade and policies. Australia comprises of six states along with ten federal territories all of which comes under the jurisdiction of the laws (Corones, 2013). The consumer law will be discussed with special reference to the case of Jimmy and the legal recourses available to him. Ascertaining Manufacturers Liability From the case study it can be inferred that Jimmy had bought a shirt from the shop of the hotel and did not exercise reasonable care while using the shirt i.e. he did not wash it before wearing it for the first time. As a result he developed allergies on his skin due to a toxic substance contained within the packaging in his shirt (Ramsay, 2006). At the same time it can also be stated that the hotel shop did not take steps while selling the shirt to Jimmy to educate him on using the shirt. Even though the shirt was packed there can be hazardous substances within the packaging and it was the responsibility of the seller to educate the consumers notwithstanding the nature of the product. The Australian Consumer Law comprises of Schedule 2 to Competition and Consumer Act, 2010 substituting as many as 20 statutes and laws over all the states and territories. Jimmy may approach the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to look into this dispute (Ramsay, 2012). The Commission in c onjunction with the Australian Securities and Investment Commission is in charge of administering and enforcing the consumer law. Under the scope of Australian Consumer Law a consumer has a broad definition that includes: Any person who acquires goods and or services worth less than $ 40,000 Goods and services that have been acquired for domestic consumption or usage even if they are priced over $40,000 Any means of transport that has been acquired principally for the purpose of transporting goods on public roads (Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, 2016). When the definition of a consumer is evaluated under the Australian Consumer Law it can be seen that Jimmy can be termed as a consumer and there was a breach of duty by the hotel shop as a result of which he developed allergies and rashes all over his body. Moreover it may be seen that the shop attendant refused to look into the matter when Jimmy went back to the Gift Shop. There was a clear evidence of rude and impolite behaviour that can be termed as offensive and uncouth. Instead of refusing to accept the fault the retailer should have shown empathy and compassion (Law, 2009). The shirt was packed in a sealed and clear plastic bag and as such Jimmy had no reason to suspect that there were any harmful chemical in the shirt. It can be stated to be the manufacturers liability as they should have taken due care while packing the shirt so that it did not contain any harmful chemical. The Australian Consumer Law clearly states that persons engaged in trade and commerce should refrain fr om engaging in unconscionable act. However when the case study of Jimmy is examined it can be stated that there was negligence in the conduct of the Gift Shop while dealing with their consumers (Lande and Averitt, 2007). Non adherence to these laws can attract severe penalty as can be observed from the penalty order against Coles Supermarket. The policies and rules are formulated by the concerned authority and the government so as to ensure fair conduct of trade among the different entities and bodies. The Australian Consumer Law has its roots from the erstwhile Trade Practices Act, 1974 with some additional features so as to cater to the changing structure of the business environment. Broadly it may be stated that the focus of this law is on ensuring competitive practices and ensure protection to the consumers. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission is the body who will look into the grievance of Jimmy and will suggest recourse (Williams, 2007). It can also impose penal ty on the Luxury Hotel Gift Shopand direct it to pay damages to Jimmy. Consumer Guarantee in Australia and its subsequent application to the case of Jimmy Consumer Guarantee in Australia effectively means that products that are sold and services that are rendered should be of acceptable quality. By the term acceptable quality it refers to safe and lasting goods without any fault. Moreover the goods should look acceptable and should function normally for the purpose of which they have been bought. Other than that products should match the descriptions as highlighted in the packaging, labels, promotions and advertising. Consumer Guarantee in Australia means that when a consumer buys goods or services they are furnished with automatic guarantees that the goods will work and perform as per the descriptions of the product (Hogarth et al, 2008). The case of Jimmy essentially highlights the importance of Consumer Guarantee Clause for the business entities in order to carry out transaction of goods and services. From the definition of quality by the Consumer Guarantee Clause it can be inferred that it should be fit for the purpose of which it was sold. Even though the shirt itself was fine the packaging was harmful that clearly breached the consumer guarantee. The consumer has the rights to claim damages and compensation for the breach in the guarantee. The Australian Consumer Law further proclaims that goods and services that are being sold need to be safe as basic criteria (Steinwall, 2009). In other words it is fundamental for the establishments and trade bodies to ensure that goods that are being sold are safe and does not harm the consumers in any way. Jimmy can seek compensation for the distress, discomfort and pecuniary losses that he suffered as a result of wearing the shirt smeared with toxic chemical. While selling the shirt to Jimmy the shop should have exercised due care for ensuring that the product does not harm the consumers. It was the sole responsibility of the shop to ensure that they sell products and commodities that does not cause any damage or blight to the end users (Lindsay, 2005). Jimmy can either approach the retail shop or the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission for seeking damages to the losses that he incurred. Even though it is difficult to estimate the exact amount of compensation that Jimmy is entitled to it may be opined that compensation will include the cost of expenses that Jimmy had to bear as a result of allergy. Thus, it will include cost of medicine, doctor fees and also the distress and inconvenience. Jimmy can also lodge a complaint using the website of Australian Competition and Cons umer Commission (Ramsay, 2012). Even though the shirt did meet the description as per the label it can be opined that it was not fit for use since there it was smeared with harmful chemical. Under consumer guarantee it is clearly stated that entities need to provide automatic guarantee irrespective of other warranty they might provide or not. As such Jimmy can seek compensation for damages and losses that he suffered as a result of wearing the shirt. It can also be opined that the Consumer Guarantee also takes into account any online products bought over the internet since a substantial number of goods are bought over the internet these days (Steinwall, 2009). Thus it can be stated that the guarantee seeks to compensate and protect the rights of the consumers over a broad range of conditions and scenarios so as to ensure holistic growth of trade and commerce. Conclusion The above paper has shed light on the consumer laws in Australia and the conditions that have to be fulfilled by the business entities in order to operate successfully. The case study involved Jimmy who bought a shirt from Hotel store that was smeared with a toxic chemical. The paper has discussed the definition of the consumer law and the scope along with applicability. From the discussion it can be seen that there was clear duty of the manufacturer to provide the consumers with product that met quality and did not cause any harm. However the shirt that was sold to Jimmy was coated with harmful chemical. The second part of the paper dealt with Consumer Guarantee in Australia and its subsequent applicability to the case of Jimmy. It was inferred that Jimmy is entitled to compensation since he suffered mental and monetary stress as a result of wearing the contaminated shirt (Corones, 2013). References: Corones, S. G. (2013).The Australian Consumer Law. Thomson Reuters, Lawbook Co.. Hogarth, S., Javitt, G., Melzer, D. (2008). The current landscape for direct-to-consumer genetic testing: legal, ethical, and policy issues.Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet.,9, 161-182. Lande, R. H., Averitt, N. W. (2007). Using the'Consumer Choice'Approach to Antitrust Law.Antitrust Law Journal,74, 175. Law, A. A. C. (2009). Fair Markets-Confident Consumers. Lindsay, D. (2005). Exploration of the Conceptual Basis of Privacy and the Implications for the Future of Australian Privacy Law, An.Melb. UL Rev.,29, 131. Ramsay, I. (2006). Consumer law, regulatory capitalism and the new learning in regulation.Sydney L. Rev.,28, 9. Ramsay, I. (2012).Consumer law and policy: Text and materials on regulating consumer markets. Bloomsbury Publishing. Steinwall, R. (2009). 25 Years of Australian Competition Law.Journal of South Pacific Law,4, 2000. Williams, T. (2007). Empowerment of whom and for what? Financial literacy education and the new regulation of consumer financial services.Law Policy,29(2), 226-256.