The case study deals with the situation of inadequate provision of goods and services that occurred at the Super-Duper RC Pty LTD (SDRC) company and resulted in a customer’s injury and subsequent harmful impacts. The Australian Consumer Law (ACL) provides guarantees that defend consumer rights in case of damages or losses due to faulty products or low-quality services. This paper aims to discuss the principles of contracts, ACL, tort law, along with Court procedure, alternative dispute resolution procedures, and appropriate remedies that can be used by the customer who got injured.
The Principles of Australian Contract Law
Australian Contract Law is primarily based on the common law and is increasingly impacted by statutes, controlling each party’s rights and responsibilities. The freedom of contract constitutes the fundamental principle of Australian Contract Law. In this regard, a case of the Medical Benefits Fund of Australia Limited v Cassidy can be considered where the advertising campaign was found misleading, similarly to the use of advertising catalogs at SDRC. Moreover, s. 12DA of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 states that “a person must not, in trade or commerce, engage in conduct about financial services that is misleading or deceptive or is likely to mislead or deceive.” Therefore, SDRC broke this section advertising the good at the price of $399 and selling it for $699.
The Principles of Australian Consumer Law (ACL)
ACL states that businesses must provide guarantees for goods and services that they sell to consumers. As for the case of SDRC, s. 87D of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 states that “personal injury damages means damages or compensation for loss or damage that is, or results from, the death of or personal injury to a person.” Furthermore, s. 87U of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 considers damages for loss of earning capacity. Hence, the victim of defective services performed by the SDRC can seek remedies under contract law as his injury resulted in limited work capacity and demotion.
The Principles of Tort Law
In Australia, tort law is based on the concept of liability for individuals’ intentional or accidental actions that cause harm to another party. In other words, a person can sue another person or entity to obtain a legal remedy for the damage caused. Therefore, in the given scenario, Donny is entitled to seek relief from SDRC’s wrongful acts that resulted in his injury and associated consequences.
Court Procedure and Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures
In view of the above, the victim can use Court procedures to seek help against SDRC and obtain remedies. In particular, s. 2 of the Court Procedures Act 2007 suggests the commencement of legal proceedings in a Court with jurisdiction as a way to sue the company. At the same time, Donny can turn to the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) processes to resolve the issue. The primary two ADR procedures can be mediation and arbitration; both aimed to resolve the dispute outside the court.
To conclude, in the given case study, SDRC failed to provide quality goods and services to Donny, who is now entitled to seek legal remedies to compensate for the harm inflicted. The principles of Australian Contract Law, Australian Consumer Law, and Tort Law take into account the issues that the victim faced. Hence, relevant acts can be used by a court of law to impose a penalty on SDRC.
Reference List
Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 (Cth), Web.
Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth), Web.
Court Procedures Act 2007 (NI), Web.
Medical Benefits Fund of Australia Limited v Cassidy [2003] FCAFC 289ю