Discriminating consumers lead to discriminating retailers who will impose new demands on domestic and international suppliers.Despite the economic rhetoric surrounding consumer sovereignty, international trade policies have focused on the supply side and on regulations.
Two hot-button agricultural issues at the WTO (technical barriers and multifunctionality) illustrate the evolving role of consumer preferences in multilateral trade discussions.Technical regulations are increasingly at the center of international policy disputes, particularly in agriculture, where sanitary and phytosanitary regulations address plant, animal and human health, and the natural environment.
Consumer protection is about protecting ordinary people who buy goods and services, from the being sold faulty goods or poor quality services from dodgy traders.
The ACL replaces 20 existing State and Territory laws into one national law , the legislation was enacted in two main parts as Schedule 2 of the renamed Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) (TPA) - Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (CCA) .
Regardless of whether consumer-information campaigns are new or just another policy layer, how to recognize and govern the influence of consumer preferences on trade policy are growing matters of concern.
Intention to create legal relations; In contract formation, intention to create legal relations purposes at sorting out cases that fail to meet the requirements for courts to take action. This is due to the fact that not all contracts are binding and that could be endorsed by courts. For instance, one party agrees to meet another party at the shopping mall. It is a moral duty for the parties to honor this agreement though it is not a legal obligation to act so (Deakin S, Johnston. A and Markesinis. B, 2003). Indeed there was misrepresentation that was fashioned by the seller. Before purchasing the television, the various special features of the television were explained to Sarah, which convinced her to purchase that particular brand of TV. This is to say, Sarah had the right to the right information, as is the case for consumer law. So the Retailer in this scenario acted malicious and fraudulent at best. To begin with, contract misrepresentation Act safeguards buyers against deceptive claims that induce you into buying something or entering a contract while grants you the leeway to claim recompense in the event of fraudulent misrepresentation. However, Retailers legal means to redress this anomaly is pegged on that fact that the false statement was made deceitfully and or negligently. But since Sarah was innocent and went ahead to believe the Retailer by relying on that statement leading to the purchase of the television worth $1000, is therefore warranted for recompense. In other words, because Sarah entered a binding contract based on fraudulent misrepresentation, then he is under obligation to cancel the contract and claim damages (Deakin S, Johnston. A and Markesinis. B, 2003). In law, a fraudulent claim is based on a misrepresentation of tangible fact, yet pure expressions of judgment or future forecast are not actionable. And yet, assertions made by Retailer qualify to be actionable because it has the foreknowledge of what is likely to happen in future. In addition, Retailer is liable for prosecution because the judgement was best on past facts hence maintaining the fraud. While protecting and guiding the consumer on the best contracts to use in order to avoid major hiccups in their operations, it also acts to promote their participation in the transaction between them and the traders. This is affected through their consideration and consultations in case of minor or major alterations in the products they had ordered. To add to that, the directive also gave a ‘grey list’ which contains contracts terms that are considered as harmful unless the trader can prove other wise. Besides, the traders are required to consider consumers input by fully informing and giving them time to respond. Unfair contract terms directives have strongly assisted the consumers to identify the traders who are out to exploit them and therefore avoid their products and services. This is a reasonable consideration as traders are given the methods to avoid with a view to winning customer loyalty (Deakin S, Johnston. A and Markesinis. B, 2003).
In the end, the results benefit both producers--who remain competitive and profitable--and consumers--who pay less for a good or a service than they would if trade barriers existed.
Trade between nations is the same as trade between people. Consider what the quality of life would be if each person had to produce absolutely everything that he or she consumed, such as food, clothing, cars, or home repairs. Compare that picture with life as it is now as individuals dedicate themselves to working on just one thing--for example, insurance sales--to earn a salary with which they can freely purchase food, a car, a home, clothing, and anything else they wish at higher quality and lower prices than if they had done it themselves.
Unfair contract terms: Due to strong pressure to ensure businesses are running at a profit, traders have previously been tempted to alter different information on the contracts without the consumer’s knowledge. As a result, the directive seeks to check this malpractice by creating a new ‘black list’ which contains which contains various contract terms that are prohibited through out the European Market. This is of great importance as it prevents the traders from altering different. Pre-contractual information: According to Australian law, it is the responsibility of the trader or retailer in this case to present the consumer with all the information that is necessary for the consumer to make the correct choices. Though the previous rules on unfair contract terms increased the ability to ensure enough information for the consumers, it had major omissions that made it easy for the traders to misguide consumers on important information. The ability of traders to build the correct goodwill for their products from the customers is guaranteed by the quality of the products they offer to them. Australian statutes governing the consumerism demands the revelation of full characteristics regarding different products and services offered to the consumers by the trader. Therefore, this is a major platform for ensuring effective ability to consider the best quality regarding different goods and services offered to the consumers. According to law of contract, deceitful information regarding products sold is a criminal offence and the Retailer in this scenario has tow options, to recompense the client of face prosecution, for providing wrong information that led to wrong choices by the consumers (Deakin S, Johnston. A and Markesinis. B, 2003). Australian Consumer law warrants for the disclosure of the right information to minimize the confusion and unfairness to the consumers during or after delivery of the goods, the traders are required to clearly state all the accruing costs related to freight and postal charges. Failure to give the right information resulting into uncalled for damages amounts to breach of contract. Much as the consumer has the right to know and compare things to do with prices, and be able to make an informed choice about a given product on the basis of their ability and will, the consumers are able to adequately plan and manage their finances with ease.
Delivery rules and passing of risks to the consumers: To gather more consumer confidence in the business world, the new directives require the traders to ensure better terms of services and products delivery to the consumers. Previously, the rules never gave specific guidelines for delivery thereby making the consumers to be prone to subsequent deterioration of the products quality during the same period. Besides, it was extremely oppressive as damages and other incumbent costs were forwarded to the consumers raising the initially stated costs of the commodities. Under the Australian consumer law, the trader is supposed to ensure delivery is affected within 30 days from the date of signing the contract with the consumer. Strongly considering the necessity of goods utility, the consumers have the right to refuse the goods and get the refunds within 7 days from the date of delivery (Deakin S, Johnston. A and Markesinis. B, 2003).
The most compelling reason to support free trade is that society as a whole benefits from it. Free trade improves people's living standards because it allows them to consume higher quality goods at less expensive prices. In the 19th century, British economist David Ricardo showed that any nation that focuses on producing goods in which it has a comparative advantage will be able to get cheaper and better goods from other countries in return. As a result of the exchange, both trading parties gain from producing more efficiently and consuming higher quality goods and services at lower prices.