Reforming State Consumer Protection Liability: An Economic Approach (original) (raw)
Related papers
The economics of consumer protection: Introduction
Australian Economic Papers, 2000
This issue of Australian Economic Papers is devoted to the economics of consumer protection. Consumer protection is necessary when markets fail due to information asymmetries, or when there is an imbalance of power between buyers and sellers in a market. Left to their own devices, and in the absence of competitive market forces, consumers will often not have the knowledge or ability to make optimal consumption choices. Errors of omission or commission by consumers can be both expensive and dangerous. Increasingly, governments of both developed and developing countries are introducing new, and more stringent, laws designed to protect consumers from a variety of sharp commercial practices. While the principle of`caveat emptor' still needs to be adhered to, consumers are now much better protected from dangerous goods, crooked traders and the perils of less-than-complete information than was the case only a decade or so ago. Among the many new laws typically being passed are laws mandating much more complete disclosure of contents, contract terms and operating and care instructions. Strict liability for dangerous goods is now common. But more consumer protection is not necessarily a good thing. As with any type of government regulation, there is an optimal level of intervention, beyond which the net marginal bene®t of interfering with the market becomes negative. And the ef®cient solution is not necessarily the most direct one. Consumer education plays a very important role in alerting buyers to the sorts of questions to ask in order to make informed choices. While consumer protection does have some of the characteristics of a public good ± it is largely non-excludable and non-rival in consumption ± it can also be obtained, ex-post, through private action. Such actions are largely undertaken by bigger, better-informed, wealthier buyers who should, in theory, be better able to protect themselves ex-ante compared with smaller, less wealthy individuals. But such market-driven consumer protection may not produce lasting or widespread dissemination of bene®ts for other consumers, unless it alerts governments to problems which they then attempt to ®x. Major issues in consumer protection involve deciding how much information to provide to buyers, how this is best done and determining the extent to which producers must be held liable for hazardous goods. The answer will vary greatly from product to product, technology to technology, and from country to country. There are ®ve papers in this issue which confront these problems. The ®rst by Rhonda Smith describes the evolving, and on occasions world-leading,
Striking a Balance: Basic Questions About Consumer Protection Law (Symposium Introduction)
Chapman Law Rev, 2004
Chapman Law Reviewís annual symposium, this year entitled ìResponsibility and Reform: Striking a Balance in the Marketplace,î is focused on an important issue in todayís legal landscape: how much and what kinds of protections should be provided to consumers? Central to this issue is how to balance the protection of consumersí persons and pocketbooks with the defense of their autonomy, how to keep consumers from entering into dangerous or disadvantageous transactions without stripping them of the freedom to choose for themselves which products, services, and deals will most benefit them. The panels of speakers for the symposium were focused on four separate but interrelated topics: Predatory Lending, Punitive Damages, Gun and Tobacco Liability, and Californiaís Unfair Trade Practices Act (Business and Professions Code Section 17200). This Introduction sets forth some of the most important questions raised in the course of the Symposium and describes some answers suggested in the articles that follow. Naturally, the authors often disagree with each other, but my goal is not to prove that one side or the other in any debate is correct but merely to lay out the questions in a methodical manner and direct the reader to the different authorsí attempts to respond to these questions.
Analysis of Consumer Protection Act - Harshika Kapoor
2021
Humans have perfected the skill of obtaining services to meet their daily requirements. Our daily lives revolve around utilizing the commodities and services available to us in order to live a comfortable and stress-free existence. We become 'consumers' when we use these services. We effectively devour the assets around us, as the name implies. The term "consumer" has been defined in Section 2 (1) (d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as: "any person who buys any goods for consideration or hires/avails any services for consideration". History: The Old Testament and the Code of Hammurabi both reference consumer protection, but primarily from a mercantile standpoint. In the United States, where the foundations for the formation and expansion of monopoly and oligopolistic capitalism were laid, an early kind of consumer defense movement arose. 1 The first consumer organizations were founded in Denmark in 1947 and the United Kingdom in 1955, when the government established the Consumer Council to give consumers a voice on matters that were previously reserved for manufacturers and traders. 2 The Single European Act, however, was the major normative breakthrough; it amended the Treaty of Rome by reaffirming the role of the Economic and Social Committee, which was given powers to protect consumers. The above-mentioned legislation has undergone several significant revisions throughout the years, paving the way for a broader consumer policy. Landmark Case: The wording "consideration paid or agreed to be paid by the consumer, as the case may be" left a large gap in the accurate interpretation of the jurisdiction requirements and
Redress for Consumers in terms of the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008: A Comparative Discussion
Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology
The Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 1 is a groundbreaking piece of legislation in the realm of not only South African consumer law but also the South African law of contract. What is more, the Act also has worldwide implications as foreign companies selling goods and services in South African consumer markets will have to comply with the new legislation. In Part 1 of this paper, the avenues of redress available to the consumer in terms of the Act and the possible practical problems pertaining thereto are discussed. Part 2 deals with redress for consumers in terms of the European Union and relevant aspects of redress in the Spanish legal system. Part 3 is a comparative conclusion with regards to redress issues for consumers generally.
Perspectives on Consumerism and Consumer Protection Act in
2016
This study focuses on the issues and challenges relating to consumerism and consumer protection in Nigeria, with particular attention to the Consumer Protection Council (CPC) Act 2004. Evidences from available literature indicate that consumerism in Nigeria, like in most Less Developed Countries has remained at the lowest ebb in spite of the prevalence of unwholesome business practices. The Nigerian consumer is thus continuously saddled with substandard goods and services, coupled with the lack of information and limited choice in the market, thus necessitating political/government efforts. In This study, it was observed that although the CPC Act recognized the rights of consumers, it does not specifically provide for these rights as they are merely implied and subsumed into the functions of the council and the state committees established by the Act. We therefore conclude that mere existence of the law is not enough. Specific protective and compensatory measures should be clearly s...
Administrative and Judicial Enforcement in Consumer Protection: The Way Forward
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2008
This text may be downloaded for personal research purposes only. Any additional reproduction for other purposes, whether in hard copy or electronically, requires the consent of the author(s), editor(s). If cited or quoted, reference should be made to the full name of the author(s), editor(s), the title, the working paper or other series, the year, and the publisher. The author(s)/editor(s) should inform the Law Department of the EUI if the paper is to be published elsewhere, and should also assume responsibility for any consequent obligation(s).
Liability for products in the Consumer Protection Bill 2006 : a comparative critique
Stellenbosch Law Review, 2006
The background to reform The Draft Consumer Protection Bill, recently published by the Department of Trade and Industry, 1 encapsulates a vision for a ''new consumer law'', 2 which has as its objective the establishment of ''a fair, accessible and sustainable marketplace for consumer products and services''. 3 The cultural change necessary to address South Africa's lack of ''a vibrant and strong consumer movement'' 4 requires to be underpinned by legal certainty and accessibility. This is particularly important in areas of liability ''characterised by imbalances in information and bargaining power between businesses and consumers''. 5 An important dimension to the proposed reform is therefore the creation of a strict liability framework to provide redress for consumers who have suffered harm due to defects in products. Until now, a consumer who was injured or who sustained property damage because of a safety defect in a product obtained redress from the producer or distributor only where it could be proved that the latter was at fault. Only three years ago, the Supreme Court of Appeal confirmed the fault requirement in relation to the manufacture, sale or distribution of goods and concluded that ''if strict liability is to be imposed it is the legislature that must do it''. 6 In section
Journal of Consumer Affairs, 2010
The first year of Barack Obama's presidency has returned consumer issues to center stage, with several contentious struggles over consumer protection. This moment can be viewed as a fourth wave of the twentieth-century consumer movement, and a comparison with the first three waves (during the Progressive Era, the New Deal, and the 1960s-1970s) offers instructive insights. In particular, the contemporary battle over the Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) bears striking similarities to the failed campaign for a Consumer Protection Agency (CPA) in the 1970s.
Protecting Consumers from Themselves: Consumer Law and the Vulnerable Consumer
2015
Attitudes toward consumer protection are shaped primarily by complex assumptions about human nature and its interaction with modern marketing. The dominant perspective governing American consumer law is individualism, a descriptive and frequently normative assumption that places watchdog responsibilities on the individual consumer. This perspective is described and analyzed through an examination of public policy arguments about (1) advertising that targets children, (2) restrictions on consumption of sugared beverages, and (3) creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Board. Individualism is then contrasted with the portrayal of consumers as vulnerable. Specifically, insights from behavioral economics and neuropsychology are used to gain a more accurate starting point for creating consumer protection laws and regulations that reflect respect for consumers as they are, rather than as who they are in deductive rational actor models of market exchange. TABLE OF CONTENTS