In this part of the assignment I am going to explain the law with respect to consumer protection in a given situation. Secondly i am going describe the remedies available for the breach of a contract.
Task one- P6
The assumption regarding the ownership of goods is that the goods must to be satisfactory as described. Another presumption is that it must be fit for purpose and reasonable length of time. Once you own a good you can do whatever you want with it. For example you can re-sell your goods if you own them. Finally another presumption is the goods must be “free” from any undisclosed charge or encumbrance and the buyer will enjoy quiet possession”.
The standards of goods guaranteed by the Consumer Rights Act are that they should be SADFaRT. This means satisfactory, as described, fit for purpose and at a reasonable length of time. The consumer rights act says that goods must be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality to the consumer. To explain this, I am going to use the “FW Moore & Co v. Landauer & Co” case. In this case the Plaintiff had agreed to sell the defendant 3000 tins of the canned fruit, all packed in cases containing 30 cans each. However, on the delivery there was 3000 tins, but some of the tins were packed in cases of 24 tins. It was held the purchaser was entitled to reject the goods offered as they were not as described. In my opinion I don’t think this is fair, but the Consumer Rights Act 2015 does state that goods must be as described.
If goods do not meet the standards which are guaranteed by the Consumer Rights Act, then the purchaser has the right to refuse the offers. The rights guaranteed are that the purchaser is entitled to a repair or replacement. If the fault can’t be fixed within the reasonable amount of time, then the consumers can get their money back. All these rights are guaranteed by the Consumer Rights Act 2015.
Section 9 of the Consumer Rights Act says that the goods must be sold in a satisfactory quality. These can include the safety, durability, freedom from minor defects, appearance and finish. All of these must be to satisfactory qualities. Every contract that supply goods are to be treated as satisfactory quality as included in the term. The exception to this rule happens when the defect was bought to the buyer’s attention whilst the contract was made or if the consumer examines the goods before the contract was made.
With the purchasing of digital content, the Consumer Rights Act 2015 says that it must be to Satisfactory quality, fit for the purpose and as described on the product. If the digital content is false/ faulty then the consumer is entitled to a repair or replacement for the digital content. if the faulty can’t be fixed in the reasonable time then the consumer has the right to rescind the contract and get there money back for the faulty good. Consumers are protected for faulty digital content that they purchase.
The Consumer Rights Act 2015 states that the services must be carried out with reasonable care and skill, which can be found in Section 49 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015. To explain this rule, I am going to use the case “Curtis v Chemical Cleaning and Dying Company 1951”. In this case the claimant had signed a contract for a wedding dress to be cleaned without reading. It was told there would be no liability to be accepted for damages that are caused to the dresses entirety. The claimant had been told that the document did not say that the liability to the beads and sequins were excluded. She was given the dress with a stain on it. The decision was that the claimant succeeded as the business was not incorporated. If a service is not carried out with reasonable care and skill, then the consumer is entitled to a repeat of the service or get some money back.
The CRA says that the contract doesn’t expressly fix any times for a serviced to be performed for the consumer and it doesn’t state how it is going to be fixed either. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 also states that the information must be treated under section 50 of CRA as included in the contract that does not fix the time either. The contract is meant to be treated as stated in the term that the trader must perform the service that they provide with a reasonable amount of time. This all shows that there is no fixed time when completing work to a deadline, but it must be reasonable.
Part 2 of the Consumer Rights Act is about the unfair terms and the grey list of unreasonable terms. In section it basically contains the general rules about fairness of contract terms and notices. Part 2 also talks about what contracts/ notices are covered by the part, the general rules enforced and the supplementary provisions. The grey list is a list of unreasonable terms that can be seen in section 2. The rules will not be different to the current rule that apply under the “Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999”.
Task one- P7
A remedy is the way a right is enforced by the court when harm, a wrongful act or an injury is imposed upon another party. To summarise a remedy it’s basically where you’re righting a wrong and make sure that he party suffered doesn’t lose out on anything. The different types of remedies include damages, Rejection, Resale, Specific performance, etc. Resale might occur if the buyer makes a default. Rejection can apply if the seller has not provided the buyer with the goods as described. For example in the Moore v Landauer case the seller had provided the correct quantity but the tinned fruits were not all packed in packs of 30 like the buyer asked, so they had the right to reject it.
Damages are sums of money that are awarded by a judge which is already paid for by the defendant to the claimant due to breach of contract. It is normal for the parties in the contract to agree what happens when one party breaches the agreement of the contract. These can form part of the contract and they are known as liquidated damages. If the amount of money isn’t agreed upon beforehand then they are known as unliquidated damages. The damages should only be compensated if any party has suffered any losses. The damages could include damage to properties, personal injury or financial loss. To explain this further i am going to use the Anglia TV v Reed case. In this case the claimant engaged Reed (defendant) to play a leading role in a play on Television. Then Reed had pulled out and Anglia wasn’t able to find another replacement. Due to the fact that Reed abandoned the play had created some expenses that summed up to £2,750. It was held that, whilst the damages had generally seeked to put the parties in a situation they would have been in if the contract was performed. Then parties may elect to claim loss and recover their expenses from the defendant. This basically shows that the claimant had suffered loss/ damages due to Reed abandoning the contract.
If there in a breach in a contract that is established, then the court of law will always award damages. The judge of the court can choose to give an equitable remedy if they consider it to be adequate enough. A claimant can only ask for an equitable remedy. Equitable remedies are basically remedies that are decided by the courts.
Injunction is an order from the court which can stop the defendant from doing something. To explain Injunction I am going to use the Lumley v Wagner 1852 case. In this case Wagner was a singer wished not to sing at the venue and so was contracted to sing another. It was held in this case that Injunction awarded instead of specific performance which was not ordered in this case. The reason why injunction was allowed instead of specific performance is due to the fact that they could have missed high notes, which could be bad for the venue.
Specific performance is an order that is carried out in court which makes the defendant perform their obligations under the contract. To explain specific performance I am going to use the Nutbrown v Thornton 1805 case. In this case law the claimant had entered into a contract in order to purchase some machinery from the defendant. The defendant then in breach of the contract refused to deliver the machines to the Claimant. However the defendant was the only manufacturer that had the machinery. The claimant then bought action to court for the breach of the contract and was seeking for specific performance. Specific performance was granted and the damages would be inadequate to compensate the claimant, due to the fact that he couldn’t buy the machines anywhere else.