Under the European Community (EC) Directive on Liability for Defective Products, considered to be the basic level that provides protection to consumers in member states, a producer shall be liable for damage caused by a defect in his product (Narita, 1996, p. 6). A producer…
The importer of a product into any member state of the European Union may also be considered as a producer under the said directive.2 However, where the producer cannot be known or identified, the supplier of such a product is treated under the directive as the producer unless the identity of the producer or the one supplying the product can be identified by him.3
In the case at bar, if the buyer would identify specifically the manufacturer of Aquawash-09 in Korea, such manufacturer may be made liable under the directive. If not, the importer of such washing machine, specifically, Heinz which is a German Company, can be made liable under the EC directive. The buyer can therefore claim against the manufacturer, the supplier or both under the EC directive.
Furthermore, under the EC directive, a defect in a product exists if the so-called objective test is established which includes “either or both the cost-risk analysis and the consumer’s expectation of safety.”4 A product is considered as defective under the EC directive if such product does not make available the safety which any person could “reasonably entitled to expect,” taking into account the following: “the presentation of the product, the use to which the product could reasonably be expected to be put, and the time when the product was put into circulation.”5 Defect may also be present in the design or the manufacturing of the product, in the failure to warn, in the instructions, and in the “developmental defects.”6 If then the product does not provide the level of safety which is expected by the consumer, it would then be considered as defective under the directive even though it functions under the designed specification.7
In the case at bar, the washing machine then may certainly be considered as defective not only because it did not function properly but because it does not provide for the level of safety reasonably expected from the product, as ...
Cite this document
(“Consumer law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words - 2”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/miscellaneous/386728-consumer-law
(Consumer Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 Words - 2)
“Consumer Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 Words - 2”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/miscellaneous/386728-consumer-law.
This right encompasses fitness for purpose for which the item was specified, the appearance and finish of the good, should be free from minor blemishes, should be safe to use and of durable quality. Failure of the goods to measure up to these criteria amounts to a breach of consumer’s statutory rights entitling the consumer to various remedies against the retailer.
In this paper, there are three scenarios with consumer law context that will be analyzed using the three afore mentioned legislations and laws. In all cases of the analysis, breaches shall be identified as well as any strict liabilities that come with them so that remedies shall be suggested in the long run.
Ideally, consumer law covers an array of topics that include fraud, unfair business practices, product liability, misrepresentation, and rights to privacy among a list of other consumer/business enterprise interactions. The core principles embedded in consumer law safeguard against frauds that may arise from pricing, personal loans, consolidation, utility turn offs, and bill collection regulations that may influence bankruptcy.
It was presumed by Andy that a repair of the brakes would render the vehicle totally road worthy, thus of satisfactory quality.In the Product Warranty Liability Act a description of Implied warranty is provided to describe the suppliers contractual responsibilities (or guarantees) regarding the quality or fitness of the goods.
In the test drive he observed a fault with the breaks. Thereafter pursuant to his rights under section 48C of the 1979 Act he obtained a price reduction of 400 pounds. Thereafter, allowing the reduction the dealer said. This is a quantity car, l dont want any
ontract for the sale of goods.1 Courts have taken the position that the Sale of Goods Act 1979 imposes upon the vendor of goods and products a duty to ensure that the goods and products sold under a contract for the sale of goods correspond with its sale’s description.2 Even