crimsonking
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2006
- Messages
- 82
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2006
This was an assessment that I did a few weeks ago. Please be honest when marking
Evaluate the effectiveness of legal processes and institutions in protecting consumers.
Consumer law is generally effective in protecting consumers from unscrupulous suppliers, manufacturers and producers. When assessing the effectiveness of consumer law the criteria is resource efficiency, accessibility, protection and recognition of individual rights and equality.
The government has addressed the issue of resource efficiency by providing alternative dispute resolutions for consumers who do not have the financial means to go to court. Arbitration is a less formal, cheaper and quicker way to gain a remedy from a supplier when an event has occurred. Mediation and conciliation has also been provided by governments. Though arbitration, conciliation and mediation are effective in a sense, they are also ineffective as they are not legally binding. Class actions have also been allowed under the 'Federal Court Act 1976 (Cth)'which allows consumers to go to court together and heard as a collective group. The 'GIO case' is an example, where 3000 employees lodged civil action against managers of the company.<O
></O>
<O></O>
Many consumers are unaware of how to gain a remedy. Accessibility is a problem. The court system is slow and takes a long time to gain a remedy. Facilities such as arbitration, mediation, conciliation, the Fair Trading Tribunal and class actions are all alternative methods in which a consumer can gain a remedy. The State government also provides Legal Aid if a consumer does not have the financial means to lodge a civil case. Though consumers who seek Legal Aid need to pass a means, merit and jurisdictional test. Once again, due to the non-legal and non-binding nature of many of these facilities it can be seen as ineffective, as the opposing party (usually the supplier/manufacturer/producer) does not have to abide by the ruling made by the third party, nor are they obliged to appear. Consumers are generally advised to seek self-help and make informed, educated decisions before entering into a contract or purchasing a product.
The ACCC is primarily responsible for protecting consumer's rights. It is the ACCC's duty to ensure and enforce the 'Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)' and the 'Trade Practices Act 1987 (NSW)' which strengthen the consumers position in contracts and also protects consumers from deceptive and misleading advertising. Strengthening of the consumers position can be seen in Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) a case which relates to the merchantable quality and implied terms of both Acts. Grant v Australian Knitting Mills (1936)is another case where the duty of case a manufacturer has was breached, causing a life threatening illness to Grant.<O
<O
Other pieces of legislation which protect the consumer are the Sale of Goods Act 1923 (NSW)which monitors the sale of goods. The Credit Act 1984 (NSW) also makes provisions for consumers who have entered into a contract.<O</O
<O</O
The courts also have an important role in protecting individual rights, under the Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW) if a misrepresentation, undue influence, unconscionability or undue influence has occurred during contract negotiations, the courts have the power to rescind the contract. In Blomley v Ryan (1956)the courts voided the contract (buying property off Ryan) as Blomley took advantage of Ryan who was an uneducated alcoholic, it was voided under unconsiconabilty. Louth v Diprose (1992) is a case where undue influence was forced upon a party, the contract was rescinded.<O</O
<O</O
Another area where courts have power to remove contracts is where language and literacy problems occur. Under the Credit At 1984 (NSW) a contract must be written in plain English and the signing party must be able to read and understand English. CBA v Amadio (1983)displays this quite clearly, where Mr and Mrs Amadio entered into a contract, it was voided as both parents had poor English skills.
The courts and ACCC are seen as effective, but due to accessibility issues, it is hard to achieve. Where protection of rights is difficult to achieve is where a supplier is in a self-regulated industry as the governing body is not the State.
</O
One of the major problems, where the law is ineffective is in consumer law is in regards to equality.Due to the high disposable income many businesses have, they can afford to hire an experienced legal team as opposed to a consumer who may not be able to afford the legal fees. Though resources such as mediation, conciliation and arbitration exists, the consumer may still have to go to court if the supplier does not abide by the decision. A day in Local Court is estimated to cost $1000 and one day in the Supreme Court (in the case of an appeal) $10 000. Many consumers cannot afford this and usually the claim is less than the fees involved. For example, ACCC v Nissan Motor Company it would of been difficult for a consumer to gain a remedy, as they would of been misled into purchasing the case. A consumer would not have the financial means to obtain a remedy against a transnational corporation such as Nissan.
As it can bee seen, the effectiveness of consumer law varies and protection of rights is not consistent. Through resource efficiency, accessibility, protection and recognition of rights and equality it is recommended that consumers educate themselves when making decisions.
<O</O
Facts:
* 858 words - too short?
* Written in 45 minutes - not enough considering the time?
* Enough cases/legislation?
* I got 20/20 for it
My sister who did legal last year said that it was worth 15-16/20. I'm at a stage in the HSc where I'm worrying about the whole scaling thing, so i just want to have a few other opinions, so if I could get a mark from you and further suggestions it would be greately appreciated.
Evaluate the effectiveness of legal processes and institutions in protecting consumers.
Consumer law is generally effective in protecting consumers from unscrupulous suppliers, manufacturers and producers. When assessing the effectiveness of consumer law the criteria is resource efficiency, accessibility, protection and recognition of individual rights and equality.
The government has addressed the issue of resource efficiency by providing alternative dispute resolutions for consumers who do not have the financial means to go to court. Arbitration is a less formal, cheaper and quicker way to gain a remedy from a supplier when an event has occurred. Mediation and conciliation has also been provided by governments. Though arbitration, conciliation and mediation are effective in a sense, they are also ineffective as they are not legally binding. Class actions have also been allowed under the 'Federal Court Act 1976 (Cth)'which allows consumers to go to court together and heard as a collective group. The 'GIO case' is an example, where 3000 employees lodged civil action against managers of the company.<O
></O><O
></O>Many consumers are unaware of how to gain a remedy. Accessibility is a problem. The court system is slow and takes a long time to gain a remedy. Facilities such as arbitration, mediation, conciliation, the Fair Trading Tribunal and class actions are all alternative methods in which a consumer can gain a remedy. The State government also provides Legal Aid if a consumer does not have the financial means to lodge a civil case. Though consumers who seek Legal Aid need to pass a means, merit and jurisdictional test. Once again, due to the non-legal and non-binding nature of many of these facilities it can be seen as ineffective, as the opposing party (usually the supplier/manufacturer/producer) does not have to abide by the ruling made by the third party, nor are they obliged to appear. Consumers are generally advised to seek self-help and make informed, educated decisions before entering into a contract or purchasing a product.
The ACCC is primarily responsible for protecting consumer's rights. It is the ACCC's duty to ensure and enforce the 'Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)' and the 'Trade Practices Act 1987 (NSW)' which strengthen the consumers position in contracts and also protects consumers from deceptive and misleading advertising. Strengthening of the consumers position can be seen in Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) a case which relates to the merchantable quality and implied terms of both Acts. Grant v Australian Knitting Mills (1936)is another case where the duty of case a manufacturer has was breached, causing a life threatening illness to Grant.<O
<O
Other pieces of legislation which protect the consumer are the Sale of Goods Act 1923 (NSW)which monitors the sale of goods. The Credit Act 1984 (NSW) also makes provisions for consumers who have entered into a contract.<O
</O<O
</OThe courts also have an important role in protecting individual rights, under the Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW) if a misrepresentation, undue influence, unconscionability or undue influence has occurred during contract negotiations, the courts have the power to rescind the contract. In Blomley v Ryan (1956)the courts voided the contract (buying property off Ryan) as Blomley took advantage of Ryan who was an uneducated alcoholic, it was voided under unconsiconabilty. Louth v Diprose (1992) is a case where undue influence was forced upon a party, the contract was rescinded.<O
</O<O
</OAnother area where courts have power to remove contracts is where language and literacy problems occur. Under the Credit At 1984 (NSW) a contract must be written in plain English and the signing party must be able to read and understand English. CBA v Amadio (1983)displays this quite clearly, where Mr and Mrs Amadio entered into a contract, it was voided as both parents had poor English skills.
The courts and ACCC are seen as effective, but due to accessibility issues, it is hard to achieve. Where protection of rights is difficult to achieve is where a supplier is in a self-regulated industry as the governing body is not the State.
</O
One of the major problems, where the law is ineffective is in consumer law is in regards to equality.Due to the high disposable income many businesses have, they can afford to hire an experienced legal team as opposed to a consumer who may not be able to afford the legal fees. Though resources such as mediation, conciliation and arbitration exists, the consumer may still have to go to court if the supplier does not abide by the decision. A day in Local Court is estimated to cost $1000 and one day in the Supreme Court (in the case of an appeal) $10 000. Many consumers cannot afford this and usually the claim is less than the fees involved. For example, ACCC v Nissan Motor Company it would of been difficult for a consumer to gain a remedy, as they would of been misled into purchasing the case. A consumer would not have the financial means to obtain a remedy against a transnational corporation such as Nissan.
As it can bee seen, the effectiveness of consumer law varies and protection of rights is not consistent. Through resource efficiency, accessibility, protection and recognition of rights and equality it is recommended that consumers educate themselves when making decisions.
<O
</OFacts:
* 858 words - too short?
* Written in 45 minutes - not enough considering the time?
* Enough cases/legislation?
* I got 20/20 for it
My sister who did legal last year said that it was worth 15-16/20. I'm at a stage in the HSc where I'm worrying about the whole scaling thing, so i just want to have a few other opinions, so if I could get a mark from you and further suggestions it would be greately appreciated.
