• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Both the common law and statute make it too easy for buyers to reject goods. Critically discuss this statement.

Extracts from this document...


'Both the common law and statute make it too easy for buyers to reject goods'. Critically discuss this statement. Introduction The rights of consumers have been protected by laws for centuries. These laws have established a variety of legal forms, which including criminal law, tort, and contract, to achieve their objectives. In addition to those laws numerous other provisions have the effects of protecting the consumer, which specify consumer protection as their primary concern. For example, during the prosecution of fraud, protecting property, or facilitating litigation. In general, the civil law assists the consumer by imposing certain obligations on manufacturers and suppliers of goods and services and by restricting attempts to exclude or cut down these obligations or the remedies available on breach. (Cartwright, 2001) It should be kept in mind that here is no universally agreed definition of the term 'consumer'. Although a number of statutes, both criminal and civil, attempt to define it for their own purposes. One example of such a definition is found in section 20( 6) of the Consumer Protection Act 1987, which states: 'Consumer' (a) In relation to any goods, means any person who might wish to be supplied with the goods for his own private use or consumption; (b) In relation to any services or facilities, means any person who might wish to be provided with the services or facilities otherwise than for the purposes of any business of his; and (c) In relation to any accommodation, means any person who might wish to occupy the accommodation otherwise than for the purposes of any business of his. ...read more.


The barriers facing them are immense. (Goldring, Maher, McKeough, & Pearson, 1998) Thus to talk about a 'free market' of equal individuals in this phenomenon is nonsense. In very few cases at all, the consumer can be said that they are equal to the supplier or the manufacturer. Besides, under the control of mass media by the suppliers and manufacturers, consumers can hardly get fully genuine information. Therefore, it makes little sense to assert that consumers are inevitably the best judges of their own wants and needs. Markets are seldom, if ever, 'free', not because that freedom is limited by government activity, but because of the activities of business organizations, especially by the powerful corporations. Information is power and consumers rarely have the opportunity to get the same information as suppliers and manufacturers. They cannot therefore compete as equal in the market. (Lowe & Woodroffe, 2004) Consumer Protection Legal rules and controls are one of the methods which can be used by the government of state. For the interests of the public as consumers, governments attempt to reduce the inequalities of markets that exist in 'real life', even if in very small dimensions. The power of the state, expressed through government rule-making and regulatory power, is a counter-force to the power of business organizations. Many of the requirements of legislation are often as simple as the principles and standards which would be observed by reputable business seeking to maintain their commercial reputations and clientele in any case. ...read more.


Ultimately, the matter can only be decided by a court after taking into account all the circumstances. (Lowe & Woodroffe, 2004) An important factor might be that the buyer was not in a position to check the goods for a longer time after the sale than usual, because, for example, he was admitted to hospital immediately after he purchased them. In other words, consumers' right of rejecting unsatisfying goods is not totally unlimited. Conclusion In most of countries, consumers have been protected by laws and the power of states. Although there is hardly agreement of the exact definition of 'consumer', efforts have been made by governments to establish variety of legal forms for buyers against the breach of suppliers and manufacturers. Along with the spread of globalization, 'consumerism' trend to give consumers more equality of power. However, in the phenomenon of 'free market', consumers may automatically be sovereign, because anyone, who does not respond consumer's needs, will be forced to leave the market. But as many people asserted 'free market' is not achievable in real life. By the reason that consumers are placed in a disadvantage position in markets, there is not doubt that their rights should be protected by laws and statutes. Although current law and regulations only obligate the safety of goods, the quality standard of goods tends to be bound in the future. The most common and effective way for buyers protect themselves is to reject the defected goods. Nevertheless, buyers have to claim in a 'reasonable time' even if there are entitled to reject the goods. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Commercial Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Commercial Law essays

  1. Limited Liability, and effect on contract and tort creditors.

    positive net present values rather than being concerned with the risk to shareholders that such projects may bring"6 the dangers of negative investment is not felt by the shareholders. Limited liability allows the shareholder to monitor performance of managers and "the increased incentive to managers to act efficiently and in

  2. The academic debate concerning on the directors duties is one of the oldest issues ...

    In any action in which a wrong is alleged to have been done to a company, the proper claimant is the company itself. This is known as "the rule in Foss v Harbottle", and the several important exceptions that have been developed are often described as "exceptions to the rule

  1. The World Trade Organization and Its Critics

    This is said due to the fact that the WTO?s rules are written by and for corporations with inside access to the negotiations. In addition, citizen input by consumer, environmental, human rights and labor organizations is consistently ignored and the public cannot attend proceedings which are not made public. ?

  2. sale of goods act 1979

    the description of the car was fit, the question came to its quality. The principle that goods can describe themselves was affirmed in the case of Beale v Taylor [1967] 1 WLR 1193.6 The Sale and Supply OF Goods Act 1994 amended s14 of the SOGA 1979 where the fact

  1. To what extent is the rule contained in the Salomon v. Salomon & Co. ...

    When his employment was terminated he set up his own business but on advice he 'caused' a company to be formed 'JM Horne & Co Ltd' in which his wife and the company's sole employee were shareholders and directors. The company proceeded to take over EB Horne's business and solicit customers from Gilford Motors.

  2. Discuss the development of Implied Terms in English Contract Law and how this is ...

    The contract, made under the law had an expressed term (both parties would be making it, like one of them is selling goods and the other one is buying it ), but some of them were unfair, some agreements may not be in the contract, parties making the contact had

  1. Separate Legal Personality.

    members nor the board of directors of a company have inherent powers to remove directors before the normal expiration of their period of office in the absence of a power to do so in the articles22. If the articles do not specify the duration of the director's appointment, however he

  2. The key to section 13 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 is interpretation.

    In the Ashington Piggeries Ltd v Christopher Hill Ltd[20] the House of Lords held that the description identified the goods. Therefore, the goods ?herring-meal? was still under the concept of description even though the goods were poisoned. In this case, the implied terms by section 13(1)[21] did not breach the contract.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work