Category: Consumer

Purely Creative Ltd and Others v The Office of Fair Trading: CA 29 Jul 2011

The appellants sought to challenge undertakings they had been required to as to the mode of conduct of prize draw competitions. The Regulations forbad misrepresentations that the addressee may already have won a prize. In particular they challenged the requirement that a participant should not be required to make any payment as a condition of collecting a prize.
Held: There was a need to refer the OFT’s cross appeal to the ECJ, and an order was so made, but the existing undertakings were to remain in effect.

Judges:

Sir Andrew Morritt Ch, Jackson, Munby LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 920, [2012] 1 CMLR 21

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Protection Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, Unfair Commercial Practices Directive 2005/29/EC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Office of Fair Trading v Purely Creative Ltd and Others ChD 2-Feb-2011
The OFT sought an order to restrain the defendants from continuing what it said were unfair commercial practices in the arrangements it made for prize draws.
Held: Each of the promotions relied upon by the Office contravened the Regulations. . .

Cited by:

Reference – Purely Creative And Others v Office of Fair Trading ECJ 18-Oct-2012
ECJ Directive 2005/29/EC – Unfair commercial practices – Practice of informing the consumer that he has won a prize and obliging him, in order to receive that prize, to incur a cost of whatever kind . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, European

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442421

W v Veolia Environmental Services (UK) Plc: QBD 27 Jul 2011

The claimant’s car had been damaged by a lorry operated by the defendant. The claimant hired a replacement car under a credit hire agreement with AE, which he signed at his home when the replacement vehicle was delivered to him. The defendant’s insurers refused to pay AE’s charges under the 2008 Regulations, and AE therefore looked to W for payment. Once the point on the Regulations had been raised W’s insurers paid the charges and in proceedings brought in his name sought to recover them from the defendant. The defendant argued that the Regulations rendered the credit hire agreement unenforceable against W, because it did not contain the notice required under regulation 7(2), and that in paying AE’s charges W had failed to mitigate his loss.
Held: Adopting and applying the reasoning of His Honour Judge Moloney Q.C. in the Cambridge County Court in Chen Wei v Cambridge Power and Light Ltd (unreported), the court held that the Regulations applied to the contract between W and AE so that it was unenforceable against him and that a claim to recover the charges from W would have failed for the reasons set out in Dimond v Lovell, had he not paid the hire. However, Judge Mackie held that W was to be treated as having paid the hire charges himself and therefore as having suffered a loss in obtaining a replacement vehicle. Having had the use of the vehicle, it was not unreasonable for W to pay the hire charges, even though he was not legally liable to do so, and accordingly he had not failed to mitigate his loss. He was therefore entitled to recover from the defendant.

Judges:

MacKie QC J

Citations:

[2012] 1 All ER (Comm) 667, [2011] EWHC 2020 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Cancellation of Contracts Made in a Consumer’s Home or Place of Work etc. Regulations 2008

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – King v The Victoria Insurance Company Limited PC 20-Mar-1896
Queensland – A cargo of wool was insured ‘at and from Townsville to London’. The lighter carrying the cargo to the ship capsized in the harbour. The insurers paid out and, taking an assignment of the action sued the defendant Government. The latter . .

Cited by:

Cited – Salat v Barutis CA 20-Nov-2013
The claimant had been knocked from his motor cyle by the defendant. He hired a replacement, but when he sought payment of the associated hire charges, the defendant said that the hire company had failed to comply with the 208 Regulations, and that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Damages

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442245

Smedleys Limited v Breed: HL 1974

The defendant company had sold a can of peas. A caterpillar was found in it.
Held: Despite having shown that they had taken all reasonable care, the defendant was guilty of selling food not to the standard required. The defence under the Act was available only if the incident was unavoidable, but that would require every person in the production line to have done everything humanly possible. Notwithstanding non-negligent quality control, there was strict liability at criminal law where a caterpillar identical in colour, size, density and weight to the peas in a tin survived the process in one out of three million tins.
Viscount Dilhorne said: ‘In 1951 the question was raised whether it was not a basic principle of the rule of law that the operation of the law is automatic where an offence is known or suspected. The then Attorney-General, Sir Hartley Shawcross, said: ‘It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be – that criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution.’ He pointed out that the Attorney-General and the Director of Public Prosecutions only intervene to direct a prosecution when they consider it in the public interest to do so and he cited a statement made by Lord Simon in 1925 when he said: ‘there is no greater nonsense talked about the Attorney-General’s duty than the suggestion that in all cases the Attorney-General ought to decide to prosecute merely because he thinks there is what the lawyers call a case. It is not true and no one who has held the office of Attorney-General supposes it is.’ Sir Hartley Shawcross’s statement was indorsed, I think, by more than one of his successors.’

Judges:

Viscount Dilhorne

Citations:

[1974] AC 839

Statutes:

Food and Drugs Act 1955

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – A and Others v National Blood Authority and Another QBD 26-Mar-2001
Liability under the Act for a defective product was established where the defect was known, even though the current state of knowledge did not make it possible to identify which of the products was affected. The Act was to be construed to be . .
Cited – Purdy, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions and others CA 19-Feb-2009
The claimant suffered a debilitating terminal disease. She anticipated going to commit suicide at a clinic in Switzerland, and wanted first a clear policy so that her husband who might accompany her would know whether he might be prosecuted under . .
Cited – Purdy, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 30-Jul-2009
Need for Certainty in Scope of Offence
The appellant suffered a severe chronic illness and anticipated that she might want to go to Switzerland to commit suicide. She would need her husband to accompany her, and sought an order requiring the respondent to provide clear guidelines on the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Crime

Updated: 12 September 2022; Ref: scu.223562

National Association of Health Stores and Another v Secretary of State for Health and Another: Admn 19 Dec 2003

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 3133 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Medicines Act 1968 168

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – National Association of Health Stores and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Department of Health CA 22-Feb-2005
Applications were made to strike down regulations governing the use of the herbal product kava-kava.
Held: The omission of any transtitional provisions had not affected anyone. Nor was the failure to consult as to the possibility of dealing . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Health, Licensing

Updated: 12 September 2022; Ref: scu.189146

CFL Finance Limited v Gertner: CA 23 Feb 2021

This appeal concerns a ‘Tomlin’ order made to dispose of proceedings which CFL Finance Limited had brought against G. It raises an important and difficult issue as to when, if ever, the Consumer Credit Act 1974 applies to agreements settling litigation.

Judges:

Lord Justice Newey

Citations:

[2021] EWCA Civ 228

Links:

Judiciary

Statutes:

Consumer Credit Act 1974

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Gertner and Another v CFL Finance Ltd ChD 22-May-2020
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer

Updated: 11 September 2022; Ref: scu.659359

South Wales Electricity Plc v The Director General of Electricity Supply: ChD 22 Oct 1999

An electricity company which also operated also as a water supplier did not have the power to issue coin operated meters which were capable of metering and charging for both electricity and water supplies. The words allowing the company to install such meters were quite restrictive.

Judges:

The Honourable Mrs Justice Arden

Citations:

Times 28-Oct-1999, Gazette 17-Nov-1999, [1999] EWHC Ch 200

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Electricity Act 1989 25 26

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Bhagwan HL 1972
Under s 3 of the 1962 Act and paras 1 and 10 of Sch 1, a Commonwealth citizen to whom the Act applied landing in the United Kingdom from a ‘ship’ (as widely defined) or an aircraft could within 24 hours of his landing be required by an immigration . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Utilities

Updated: 11 September 2022; Ref: scu.135814

Gertner and Another v CFL Finance Ltd: ChD 22 May 2020

Citations:

[2020] EWHC 1241 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – CFL Finance Limited v Gertner CA 23-Feb-2021
This appeal concerns a ‘Tomlin’ order made to dispose of proceedings which CFL Finance Limited had brought against G. It raises an important and difficult issue as to when, if ever, the Consumer Credit Act 1974 applies to agreements settling . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Consumer

Updated: 10 September 2022; Ref: scu.650961

Brookes v HSBC Bank Plc: CA 29 Mar 2011

The appellant had failed in his challenge to the bank’s imposition of charges.

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 354

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Credit Act 1974 78

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Carey v HSBC Bank plc, Yunis v Barclays Bank plc and similar QBD 23-Dec-2009
(Manchester Mercantile Court) The court considered the effects in detail where a bank was unable to comply with a request under section 78 of the 1974 Act to provide a copy of the agreement signed by the client.
Held: The court set out to give . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Banking, Costs

Updated: 04 September 2022; Ref: scu.431243

Wilson v First County Trust: CA 23 Nov 2000

Citations:

[2000] EWCA Civ 427, [2001] QB 407

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (1) CA 3-Nov-2000
The administrative charges for entering into a loan were not to be included in the loan, but rather as an item entering into the total charge for credit. To hold otherwise went against accounting practice, would disguise the cost of the loan, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.428031

McGinn v Grangewood Securities Ltd: CA 23 Apr 2002

The lender used part of the loan to repay a small amount of arrears of the claimant on another loan. The part so used was not part of the objective of the loan, but one of the costs of obtaining it.
Held: The deduction was properly part of the true cost of the credit, and so was not part of the credit. As a consequence, the consumer loan, and the charge securing it, were void and unenforceable. The purpose of section 127(3), which may work harshly against a creditor, is to ensure that the amount of credit is correctly stated.

Judges:

Lord Justice Kennedy, Lord Justice Clarke and Lady Justice Hale

Citations:

Times 30-May-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 522, [2003] CCLR 11

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Credit (Total Charge for Credit) Regulations 1980 (SI 1980 No 51) 4(2), Consumer Credit Act 1974 9(4) 127(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Watchtower Investments Ltd v Payne and Another CA 20-Jul-2001
The mortgagor borrowed funds against the charge, and part of the condition of the loan was that any arrears on the first charge must be discharged. The total amount of the loan was calculated to include sufficient to discharge the arrears on the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Wilson and Another v Hurstanger Ltd CA 4-Apr-2007
The company sought to enforce its loan agreement and charge over the defendants’ property. The defendants appealed saying that the agreement was unenforceable under the Act, since a commission had been paid to the introducing broker, and his fee had . .
Cited – Southern Pacific Mortgage Ltd v Heath CA 5-Nov-2009
The court considered the effect of an agreement within the 1974 Act falling into more than one category of agreement. Part was used to be used for the repayment of an existing mortgage (restricted use credit), and part was unrestricted. The question . .
Cited – Carey v HSBC Bank plc, Yunis v Barclays Bank plc and similar QBD 23-Dec-2009
(Manchester Mercantile Court) The court considered the effects in detail where a bank was unable to comply with a request under section 78 of the 1974 Act to provide a copy of the agreement signed by the client.
Held: The court set out to give . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Consumer

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.171344

Imperial Tobacco Ltd, Re Judicial Review: SCS 30 Sep 2010

(Opinion) The petitioner sought review of the 2010 Act, saying that its provisions related to matters reserved to the UK parliament by the 1998 Act, and were therefore outwith the powers granted to the Scottish Parliament.
Held: The petition for judicial review was rejected. None of the appellants’ challenges to the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament to pass sections 1 and 9 of the 2010 Act were well founded.

Judges:

Lord Bracadale

Citations:

[2010] ScotCS CSOH – 134, 2010 SLT 1203, 2010 GWD 32-655

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Tobacco and Primary Medical Services (Scotland) Act 2010 1(1) 9, Scotland Act 1998 29(1)

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

Opinion – Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate SC 12-Dec-2012
The claimant company said that the 2010 Act was outside the competence of the Scottish Parliament insofar as it severely restricted the capacity of those selling cigarettes to display them for sale. They suggested two faults. First, that the subject . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Constitutional, Consumer

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425209

Brophy v HFC Bank: QBD 22 Mar 2010

The customer sought to appeal against a finding of liability for the debt on his credit card, and that the credit card agreement which operated between Mr Brophy and the bank for a period of some 14 years, from 1994 to 2008, was a valid and enforceable agreement.
Held: The appeal failed.

Judges:

Flaux J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 819 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Credit Act 1974 59(1)

Citing:

Approved – Hurstanger Ltd v Wilson 2006
(Coventry County Court) Michael Douglas discussed the 1983 Regulations, saying: ‘The 1983 Regulations prescribe, among other things, the minimum contents of a regulated agreement, the information which must be brought to the attention of the . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – HSBC Bank Plc v Brophy CA 2-Feb-2011
The customer appealed against an order finding that his credit card agreement was binding upon him.
Held: The appeal failed. His argument that the application form amounted only to an invitation to treat, and that the contract was one made by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Banking

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.424872

Moriarty and Another v Various Customers of BA Peters Plc (In Administration): ChD 22 Jul 2008

Judges:

Strauss QC Hhj

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 2203 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See also – Moriarty and others v Various Customers of BA Peters Plc (In Administration) ChD 29-Apr-2008
The company had acted as boat sales and brokerage. Claims were made on its insolvency as to the status of boats sold and unsold, and of deposits paid and held by the company. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Moriarty and Another v Atkinson and Various Customers of BA Peters Plc CA 16-Dec-2008
The company, a boat sales agent, made a promise to its customers to hold the funds received from them in a trust account. In breach of that promise, it used the funds to pay its own debt. The customers now appealed against a refusal to allow them to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Consumer, Equity

Updated: 24 August 2022; Ref: scu.276673

Janwing Cleaning Services Ltd Trading As Holmes v London Borough of Lambeth: FTTGRC 14 Oct 2019

Appeal against a Final Notice issued by the Council, in which the Council imposed a financial penalty of pounds 5,000 on the Appellant for failures to display a list of fees and a statement concerning membership of a client money protection scheme.

Citations:

[2019] UKFTT PR – 2019 – 0040

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Rights Act 2015

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Consumer

Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.648202

E. Friz GmbH v Carsten von der Heyden (Environment And Consumers): ECJ 15 Apr 2010

ECJ Consumer protection – Contracts negotiated away from business premises Scope of Directive 85/577/EEC – Entry into a closed-end real property fund established in the form of a partnership – Cancellation.
‘ . . art.5 (2) of the Directive provides that notification by the consumer of the renunciation of the effects of his undertaking has the effect of releasing him from any obligations under the cancelled contract.
It follows that, if the consumer has been properly informed of his right of renunciation, he may be released from his contractual obligations by exercising his right of renunciation within the period provided for in art.5(1) of the Directive, in accordance with the procedure laid down by national law.
On the other hand, as the Court has already held, where he did not receive that information, that period of not less than seven days does not start to run, so that the consumer can exercise his right of renunciation under art.5 (1) of the Directive at any time . . ‘

Citations:

C-215/08, [2010] EUECJ C-215/08, [2010] 3 CMLR 23

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 85/577/EEC

Citing:

Cited – Heininger v Bayerische Hypo-und Vereinsbank AG ECJ 13-Dec-2001
ECJ Consumer protection – Doorstep selling – Right of cancellation – Agreement to grant credit secured by charge on immovable property. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Robertson v Swift SC 9-Sep-2014
Notice Absence did not Remove Right to Cancel
The defendant had contracted to arrange the removal of the claimant’s household goods on moving house. The claimant cancelled the contract, made at his housel, but refused to pay the cancellation fee, saying that the contract not having been made at . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Consumer

Updated: 17 August 2022; Ref: scu.408531

IDE v ATB Sales Ltd: QBD 17 Jul 2007

The claimant was injured when he fell from his bicycle. The handlebar was broken. And the parties disputed whether the break was the cause or result of the fall. The handlebar was of an ultra light kind, which the manufacturer recommended was to be checked regularly and changed as necessary.
Held: ‘the conclusion to be drawn from the totality of the evidence is that the left hand handlebar of Mr Ide’s bike was defective and that it was that defect which caused the handlebar to fracture with the result that Mr Ide fell off the bike and suffered serious injuries.’

Judges:

Gray J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1667 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Protection Act 1987 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Ide v ATB Sales Ltd and Another CA 28-Apr-2008
Each appellant challenged how the judge had decided between alternative proofs of causation of the respective loss. In Ide, the claimant asserted a fault in a cycle handlebar, and in Lexus, the claimant asserted that it caught fire whilst . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Consumer

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.254587

Terre Wallonne v Wallonia: ECJ 4 Mar 2010

ECJ Directive 2001/42 / EC – Assessment of the effects of certain plans and programs on the environment – Directive 91/676 / EEC – Protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources – Programs of action Designated Vulnerable Areas

Citations:

C-110/09, [2010] EUECJ C-110/09 – O

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Opinion – Terre Wallonne v Wallonia ECJ 17-Jun-2010
ECJ Directive 2001/42/EC – Assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment – Directive 91/676/EEC – Protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment, Consumer

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.403463

Patel v Patel: QBD 10 Dec 2009

The parties had entered into a loan agreement at a high rate of annual interest but with monthly rests. The court was asked to set aside the agreement as unfair under the 1974 Act.

Judges:

Leggatt QC J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 3264 (QB), [2010] 1 All ER (Comm) 864, [2010] Bus LR D73

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Credit Act 1974 140B

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Barnes and Another v Black Horse Ltd QBD 31-May-2011
The claimants sought repayment by the bank of sums paid to them for Payment Protection Insurance policies sold to them in connection with loans made by the bank. The Bank now resisted an application for leave to amend the particulars of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Banking

Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.393038

Jack and Another (London Scottish Finance Ltd) v Craig and Others: ChD 17 Dec 2013

Application by the joint administrators of LSF for directions arising out of loan agreements made or acquired by LSF before the administration began, under which secured loans were made to consumers but which were unenforceable because they contravened provisions of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.
Held: The phrase ‘realisation of the security’ in section 106, is to be interpreted conventionally to achieve the policy objective (section 113) that the security provided under the regulated agreement could not be enforced so as to benefit the creditor to any greater extent than would be the case if the security were not provided. In a secured loan to which section 106(d) applied, the provisions did not catch all sums paid by the debtor in discharge of the loan.

Judges:

Sir Terence Etherton Ch

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 4047 (Ch), [2013] WLR(D) 498, [2014] Bus LR 424, [2013] CTLC 231

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Insolvency Act 1986, Consumer Credit Act 1974 106(d)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Insolvency, Consumer, Banking

Updated: 14 August 2022; Ref: scu.519223

Verbraucherzentrale Nordrhein-Westfalen eV v Heinrich Heine GmbH: ECJ 28 Jan 2010

ECJ (Environment And Consumers) – Opinion – Directive 97/7/CE Consumer protection – Distance contracts – Right of withdrawal – Consumer charged with the cost of delivering the goods.
(Preliminary opinion) The company challenged an injunction against it to restrain it from requiring customers who returned goods under purchases governed by the regulations, to pay the delivery costs of goods even if returned.
Held: The question was as to whether such sums represented costs within the Directive. It was not a term defined in the Directive. The Directive used the term ‘price’ in several places, but here used the term ‘sums paid’ which must be a broader term, and ‘there is no justification for the view that ‘sums paid’ means only the price of the goods or the service, which would inevitably exclude an obligation to repay the other contractual costs paid by the consumer to the supplier in connection with a distance contract.’ This interpretation was supported by the phrase ‘Free of charge’.
The balance in the sharing of the risks and burdens in the case of a distance contract where the consumer withdraws, which is provided for by Directive 97/7 in favour of the consumer, would be impaired if, in addition to the direct cost of return which the Member State may impose on the consumer, he also had to pay the cost of delivering the goods.

Judges:

Paolo Mengozzi AG

Citations:

C-511/08, [2010] EUECJ C-511/08 – O

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 97/7/CE on the protection of consumers in respect of distance contracts

Cited by:

See Also – Verbraucherzentrale Nordrhein-Westfalen eV v Heinrich Heine GmbH ECJ 15-Apr-2010
ECJ Directive 97/7/EC Consumer protection – Distance contracts – Right of withdrawal – Consumer charged with the cost of delivering the goods . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Consumer

Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.396579

Rosalba Alassini and Others: ECJ 19 Nov 2009

ECJ (Environment And Consumers) Opinion – Legal disputes between end-users and providers in the area of electronic communications – Directive 2002/22/EC Mandatory out-of-court dispute resolution as a condition for the admissibility of legal proceedings Principle of effective judicial protection.

Citations:

C-320/08, [2009] EUECJ C-320/08 – O

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2002/22/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Opinion – Rosalba Alassini and Others ECJ 18-Mar-2010
Reference for a preliminary ruling Principle of effective judicial protection Electronic communications networks and services Directive 2002/22/EC Universal Service Disputes between end’users and providers Mandatory to attempt an out-of-court . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer

Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.384081

Doyle v PRA Group (UK) Ltd: CA 23 Jan 2019

Whether the cause of action for the outstanding sums accrued when D first defaulted in his payments or only when D failed to comply with the default notice stipulated by CCA s.87(1) and required by clause 8f of the Agreement. D appealed from a finding against him.
Held: The appeal failed. ‘The effect of the introductory wording of clause 8f of the Agreement (‘Subject to us sending you any notice required or taking any steps required by law’) and, more particularly, CCA s.87(1) is that, absent service and expiry of a default notice compliant with CCA ss.87 and 88, there would have been both a complete defence to a claim for all outstanding sums under the Agreement and an unanswerable right to strike out the claim.’ Whether a delay which had become abusive could be used under s140A and 140B to set aside the consequences of s87 was not before the court.

Judges:

Sir Terence Etherton Mr, Lord Justice Flaux
And
Lord Justice Peter Jackson

Citations:

[2019] ECC 13, [2019] EWCA Civ 12, [2019] 1 WLR 3783, [2019] WLR(D) 236

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Consumer Credit Act 1974 87(1), Limitation Act 1980 5

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Read v Brown CA 1-Dec-1888
Lord Esher defined the phrase ’cause of action’ to mean ‘Every fact which it would be necessary for the plaintiff to prove, if traversed, in order to support his right to the judgment of the court.’ . .
Cited – Coburn v Colledge CA 5-Apr-1897
A solicitor commenced an action on June 12th, 1896 for his fees for work which had been completed on May 30th 1889.
Held: A period of limitation runs from the date on which the ingredients of the cause of action are complete. The statute of . .
Cited – Central Electricity Generating Board v Halifax Corporation HL 1963
Under the 1947 Act, the assets of electricity undertakings were transferred to to electricity boards. Property held by local authorities as authorised undertakers should, on vesting day, vest in the relevant board. A question arose as to whether . .
Cited – Swansea City Council v Glass CA 1992
The defendant had failed himself to repair his property, and the Local Authority carried out the work itself under the 1957 Act. It sought to recover the associated costs from the defendant, but he said that their claim was time barred, being more . .
Cited – Sevcon Ltd v Lucas CAV Ltd HL 1986
A claim was brought for the infringement of a patent. It was brought after the specification had been published, but before the patent had been sealed.
Held: Time might run from a date before the plaintiff was entitled to sue. The cause of . .
Cited – Harrison v Link Financial Ltd Merc 28-Feb-2011
. .
Cited – Grace and Another v Black Horse Ltd CA 30-Oct-2014
The appellant had entered into a Consumer Credit Agreement with the respondent, but the form signed by him was not the same as that signed by the bank, and it was unenforceable. He fell into arrears. . .
Cited – McGuffick v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc ComC 6-Oct-2009
Requirements for Enforcing Consumer Loan Agreement
The claimant challenged the validity of a loan agreement with his bank as a regulated consumer credit agreement. After default, the lender failed to satisfy a request for a copy of the agreement under section 77. The bank said that though it could . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Consumer, Banking

Updated: 09 August 2022; Ref: scu.632652

McGuffick v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc: ComC 6 Oct 2009

Requirements for Enforcing Consumer Loan Agreement

The claimant challenged the validity of a loan agreement with his bank as a regulated consumer credit agreement. After default, the lender failed to satisfy a request for a copy of the agreement under section 77. The bank said that though it could not enforce the agreement, it remained valid and that default would be reported to credit reference agencies. The court was asked whether during a period when the agreement was unenforceable for non-compliance, the debt was extinguished/suspended or continued and what steps were available to the bank.
Held: The House of Lords in Wilson had left this situation unclear, and the conflicting judgements were issued without full citation of the case law. The effect of unenforceability under section 65 is that the rights of the creditor and corresponding liability or obligations of the debtor do exist but are unenforceable, rather than that those rights were never acquired or that the creditor was deprived of those rights whilst the agreement was unenforceable.
The 1974 Act did not make clear what was meant by enforcement, but reference to credit reference agencies was said by the claimant to be coercive. Steps up to and including applications to court for permission to enforce such an agreement did not themselves amount to enforcement.
The 2008 regulations were not enforceable by private action.

The claimant had objected under the 1998 Act to the continued holding of information regarding his account. That claim failed: ‘There is simply no basis for the contention that the data is not being processed fairly and lawfully. The processing of the data by sharing it with other financial institutions through the CRAs, pursuant to the Principles of Reciprocity, is clearly in the legitimate interests of the bank, the CRAs and other financial institutions, for all of whom the governing principle is that the sharing of data has the aim of promoting responsible lending.’

Judges:

Flaux J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 2386 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Credit Act 1974, Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, Directive 2005/29EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices., Data Protection Act 1998 10(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2) HL 10-Jul-2003
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its . .
Cited – Taylor v Great Eastern Railway Company 1901
The section provided that: ‘A contract for the sale of any goods of the value of ten pounds or upwards shall not be enforceable by action unless the buyer shall accept part of the goods so sold, and actually receive the same, or give something in . .
Cited – Rankine v American Express Services Europe Ltd 2009
The court considered the enforcement of a contract which offended the 1974 Act.
Held: The bringing of proceedings is only a step taken with a view to enforcement and not actually enforcement. . .
Cited – Eastern Distributors Limited v Goldring (Murphy, Third Party) CA 1957
The court considered the meaning of the phrase: ‘shall not be entitled to enforce’ in the section.
Held: ‘How is the present case affected by the fact that the hire-purchase agreement is unenforceable? If the Act said that it was void, then of . .
Cited – VTB-VAB v Total Belgium NV; Galatea BVBA v Sanoma Magazines Belgium NV ECJ 21-Oct-2008
ECJ (Approximation of Laws) Opinion – Admissibility of a reference for a preliminary ruling – Proper subject of interpretation Relevance to the decision Combined offers – Directive 2005/29/EC – Interpretation in . .
Cited – Conister Trust Ltd v John Hardman and Co CA 21-Jul-2008
The court was asked whether an agreement by the defendant solicitors under a personal injury litigation funding scheme, to discharge a client’s ‘remaining liability’ under a loan agreement applies on its true construction where the loan agreement is . .
Cited – Orakpo v Manson Investments Ltd HL 1977
Transactions were entered into under which loans were made to enable the borrower to acquire and develop certain properties were held to be unenforceable under the 1927 Act. The effect was to enrich the borrower, who had fallen into arrears of . .
Cited – Regina v Modupe CACD 1991
The appellant obtained loans enabling him to buy cars by giving false information when entering into hire purchase agreements. The relevant agreement did not contain all the prescribed information and was improperly executed so that by virtue of . .

Cited by:

Cited – Carey v HSBC Bank plc, Yunis v Barclays Bank plc and similar QBD 23-Dec-2009
(Manchester Mercantile Court) The court considered the effects in detail where a bank was unable to comply with a request under section 78 of the 1974 Act to provide a copy of the agreement signed by the client.
Held: The court set out to give . .
Cited – Doyle v PRA Group (UK) Ltd CA 23-Jan-2019
Whether the cause of action for the outstanding sums accrued when Mr Doyle first defaulted in his payments or only when Mr Doyle failed to comply with the default notice stipulated by CCA s.87(1) and required by clause 8f of the Agreement. Mr Doyle . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Banking, Information

Updated: 08 August 2022; Ref: scu.375741

Grace and Another v Black Horse Ltd: CA 30 Oct 2014

The appellant had entered into a Consumer Credit Agreement with the respondent, but the form signed by him was not the same as that signed by the bank, and it was unenforceable. He fell into arrears.

Judges:

Lord Dyson MR, Beatson, Briggs LJJ

Citations:

[2014] EWCA Civ 1413, [2015] 2 All ER (Comm) 465, [2015] 3 All ER 223, [2014] WLR(D) 460, [2015] BUS LR 1

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Consumer Credit Act 1974 63

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Doyle v PRA Group (UK) Ltd CA 23-Jan-2019
Whether the cause of action for the outstanding sums accrued when Mr Doyle first defaulted in his payments or only when Mr Doyle failed to comply with the default notice stipulated by CCA s.87(1) and required by clause 8f of the Agreement. Mr Doyle . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Banking

Updated: 08 August 2022; Ref: scu.538187

Veedfald v Arhus Amtskommune: ECJ 10 May 2001

A hospital manufactured and used in its hospitals defective fluid for use in kidney operations. It denied liability under the defective product laws on the basis that it had not put the product into circulation, and that it had not been manufactured for an economic purpose, but rather for supply within the publicly funded health group.
Held: The exemptions under the directive were listed exhaustively, and therefore must be read restrictively. The fact that the patient did not pay directly for the service and that it was funded through taxation did not mean that it was not an economic or business activity, and nor was it charitable. Member states could not restrict the ranges of injury for which damages were recoverable.

Citations:

Times 04-Jun-2001, C-203/99, [2001] EUECJ C-203/99

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Directive 85/374/EEC Approximation of laws for liability for defective products.

Jurisdiction:

European

European, Personal Injury, Consumer

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.90138

Verein Fur Konsumenten-Information v Osterreichische Kreditsversicherungs Ag: ECJ 18 May 1998

Tourists having paid an operator before their departure were forced to pay a second time before leaving their hotel. The operators insolvency allowed them to claim from operator’s insurers under the protection of the Directive.

Citations:

Times 18-May-1998, C-346/96, [1998] EUECJ C-346/96

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Directive 90/314/EEC on package holidays

Jurisdiction:

European

Consumer

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.90148

Bowland Dairy Products v Commission (Environment And Consumers): ECFI 29 Oct 2009

ECJ Action for damages Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 – Rapid alert system Supplementary notification – Competence of the national authorities Commission’s opinion not binding Modification of the subject-matter of the dispute Inadmissibility.

Citations:

T-212/06, [2009] EUECJ T-212/06

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 178/2002

Jurisdiction:

European

Agriculture, Consumer

Updated: 05 August 2022; Ref: scu.380276

Zentrale zur Bekampfung unlauteren Wettbewerbs eV v Plus Warenhandelsgesellschaft mbH: ECJ 3 Sep 2009

ECJ Environment And Consumers – French Text – Opinion – Admissibility of a preliminary ruling qualifying Relevance Subject to the decision to make joint offers Interpretation in accordance with Directive 2005/29/EC Directive Harmonising Consumer Protection Unfair Commercial Practices – National legislation laying down a prohibition in principle of commercial practices interpretation under which the participation of consumers in a contest or promotional game for the acquisition of a good or service

Citations:

C-304/08, [2009] EUECJ C-304/08 – O

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2005/29/CE

Cited by:

Opinion – Zentrale zur Bekampfung unlauteren Wettbewerbs eV v Plus Warenhandelsgesellschaft mbH ECJ 14-Jan-2010
ECJ Directive 2005/29/EC – Unfair commercial practices – National legislation laying down a prohibition in principle of commercial practices which make the participation of consumers in a lottery conditional on . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Consumer

Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.374463

Sturgeon and Others v Condor Flugdienst GmbH: ECJ 2 Jul 2009

Opinion (Joined cases) – Air transport – Distinction between the notions of ‘delay’ and ‘cancellation’

Judges:

Sharpston AG

Citations:

C-402/07, [2009] EUECJ C-402/07 – O, C-432/07, [2009] EUECJ C-432/07

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Cited by:

Opinion – Sturgeon and Others v Condor Flugdienst GmbH ECJ 19-Nov-2009
The claimants’ flights had been cancelled. In one case the passengers had been booked on an alternative flight which had been treated as a substitute for the original flight and the carriage had been performed under the original tickets. In the . .
Cited – Jet2Com Ltd v Huzar CA 11-Jun-2014
The claimant passenger complained that he had not been compensated as required when his flight was delayed. The airline now appealed against a decision that a mechanical fault in the aircraft did not amount to exceptional circumstances so as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Transport, Consumer

Updated: 30 July 2022; Ref: scu.347538

Salat v Barutis: CA 20 Nov 2013

The claimant had been knocked from his motor cyle by the defendant. He hired a replacement, but when he sought payment of the associated hire charges, the defendant said that the hire company had failed to comply with the 208 Regulations, and that since the claimant had no obligation to pay, he could not claim the sum as damages. The claimant appealed against the court’s acceptance of the argument.

Judges:

Moor-Bick, Patten, Rafferty LJJ

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Civ 1499

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Cancellation of Contracts made in a Consumer’s Home or Place of Work etc. Regulations 2008, Council Directive 85/577/EEC, Consumers, Estate Agents and Redress Act 2007^

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Dimond v Lovell HL 12-May-2000
A claimant sought as part of her damages for the cost of hiring a care whilst her own was off the road after an accident caused by the defendant. She agreed with a hire company to hire a car, but payment was delayed until the claim was settled.
Cited – W v Veolia Environmental Services (UK) Plc QBD 27-Jul-2011
The claimant’s car had been damaged by a lorry operated by the defendant. The claimant hired a replacement car under a credit hire agreement with AE, which he signed at his home when the replacement vehicle was delivered to him. The defendant’s . .

Cited by:

Cited – Moseley, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Haringey SC 29-Oct-2014
Consultation requirements
The claimant challenged a decision of the respondent reducing the benefits under the Council Tax Reduction Scheme reducing Council Tax for those in need, saying that the Council’s consultation had been inadequate.
Held: The consultation was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Contract

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.518313

Robertson v Swift: CA 15 Jan 2013

The claimant removal company sought payment of its fees after the defendant purported to cancel the arrangement for moving his goods. The defendant now appealed against rejection of his claim that the the contract was cancellable within the 2008 Regulations. The district judge said that the Regulations applied to a contract made only on one visit to the defendant’s home. On this occasion two visits had been involved. The Regulations applied to a contract made ‘(a) during a visit by the trader to the consumer’s home or place of work, or to the home of another individual’
Held: The appeal succeeded. The Regulations applied to a contract made at the consumer home irrespective of whether there had been earlier negotiations. The use of the indefinite article did not limit the contractual process to a single visit. Since the claimant had not given notice of the cancellation right, and the agreement unenforceable. However that also meant that the deposit was not repayable. This was so even though the claimant had visited only at the request of the defendant.
The 2008 Regulations went beyond the requirements of the Directive. Were they ultra vires? Before they had been brought in a clear policy decision was made to extend the protection, and the Regulations were enacted under the 2007 Act and were not dependent upon the terms of the Directive.
The fact that there had been earlier negotiations elsewhere did not work to disapply the 2008 Regulations where in fact the contract was concluded the consumer’s home. The remover was not able to recover the cancellation fee. However neither was the appellant able to recover the initial 1,000 pound deposit he had paid: ‘Since the claimant did not serve any written notice under paragraph 7 (2) of the 2008 Regulations, there was no cancellation period as defined in paragraph 2 (1) of the Regulations. It follows that the defendant was not entitled to cancel the contract under paragraph 7 (1). The effect of the 2008 Regulations is that the contract remained alive, but it was unenforceable as against the defendant.
It follows from this analysis that paragraph 10 (1) of the 2008 Regulations does not apply. Therefore the defendant has no right under the Regulations to recover the andpound;1,000 deposit which he paid.’
Jackson LJ adumbrated two possible interpretations of regulation 5(a). The first was that the regulation only applied where the contract was negotiated and concluded during a single visit to the consumer’s home. The second was that it applied if the consumer’s home was where the contract was concluded, whether or not earlier negotiations had taken place there. He concluded that the second of these was to be preferred.

Judges:

Mummery, Jackson, Lewison LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 1794, [2013] WLR(D) 11, [2013] Bus LR 479

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Council Directive 85/577/EEC, Consumer Protection (Cancellation of Contracts Concluded away from Business Premises) Regulations 1987, European Communities Act 1972, Consumers, Estate Agents and Redress Act 2007, Cancellation of Contracts made in a Consumer’s Home or Place of Work etc Regulations 2008

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Robertson v Swift SC 9-Sep-2014
Notice Absence did not Remove Right to Cancel
The defendant had contracted to arrange the removal of the claimant’s household goods on moving house. The claimant cancelled the contract, made at his housel, but refused to pay the cancellation fee, saying that the contract not having been made at . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Consumer, European

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.469777

Freiburger Kommunalbauten GmbH Baugesellschaft and Co. KG v Ludger Hofstetter, Ulrike Hofstetter: ECJ 1 Apr 2004

ECJ Directive 93/13/EEC – Unfair terms in consumer contracts – Contract for the building and supply of a parking space – Reversal of the order of performance of contractual obligations provided for under national law – Clause obliging the consumer to pay the price before the seller or supplier has performed his obligations – Obligation on the seller or supplier to provide a guarantee.
The Court considered the role of the ECJ and of the national court in relation to the determination as to whether a particular term was unfair. It stated that the issue of unfairness turned on all the facts and was for the national court. Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms and consumer contracts, which the Regulations implement, applies to contracts in respect of land.

Citations:

C-237/02, [2004] EUECJ C-237/02, [2004] ECR I-3403, [2004] 2 CMLR 13

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Office of Fair Trading v Foxtons Ltd ChD 17-Jul-2008
Complaint was made that the Foxtons standard terms of acting in residential lettings were unfair. Foxtons objected to the jurisdiction of the Claimant to intervene.
Held: On a challenge to an individual contract, the court would be able to see . .
Cited – Peabody Trust v Reeve ChD 2-Jun-2008
The court was asked to sanction the unilateral alteration by the landlord of the terms of some ten thouand tenancies. The agreements contained a clause which the landlord said allowed for variations under the Housing Act 1985. The landlord was a . .
Cited – Office of Fair Trading (OFT) v Abbey National Plc and Others SC 25-Nov-2009
The banks appealed against a ruling that the OFT could investigate the fairness or otherwise of their systems for charging bank customers for non-agreed items as excessive relative to the services supplied. The banks said that regulation 6(2) could . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Contract

Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.195731

Eva Martin Martin v EDP Editores, SL: ECJ 7 May 2009

ECJ Opinion – Directive 85/577 – Consumer Protection in the case of contracts concluded away from business premises – Termination – Failure to inform the consumer of his right to terminate the contract of consumer protection measures in the absence of provision of information nullity relative and absolute nullity of the contract – Recognition ex officio
The Court considered the centrality of the right of cancellation to the Directive: ‘ the directive ensures consumer protection by granting, first of all, a right of cancellation to the consumer. Such a right seeks specifically to offset the disadvantage, for the consumer, of sales which take place away from business premises, to enable him over a period of at least seven days to assess the obligations arising under the contract
In order to strengthen consumer protection in situations where consumers find themselves caught unawares, art 4 of the Directive also requires traders to give consumers written notice of their right to cancel the contract and the conditions for and means of exercising such a right.
Lastly, it is apparent from art 5(1) of the Directive that the minimum period of seven days must be calculated from the date of receipt of that notice from the trader. That provision is explained, as the Court has previously indicated, by the fact that if the consumer is not aware of the existence of the right of cancellation, he will not be able to exercise that right
In other words, the system of protection established by the Directive assumes not only that the consumer, as the weaker party, has the right to cancel the contract, but also that he is made aware of his rights by being specifically informed of them in writing.
It must therefore be held that the obligation to give notice of the right of cancellation laid down in art.4 of the Directive plays a central role in the overall scheme of that directive, as an essential guarantee, as the Advocate General stated in [AG55] and [AG56] of her Opinion, for the effective exercise of that right and, therefore, for the effectiveness of consumer protection sought by the Community legislature.’

Judges:

Trstenjak AG

Citations:

C-227/08, [2009] EUECJ C-227/08 – O, [2009] ECR 1-11939

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 85/577

Cited by:

Opinion – Eva Martin Martin v EDP Editores, SL ECJ 17-Dec-2009
ECJ Directive 85/577/EEC Article 4 Consumer protection – Contracts negotiated away from business premises – Right of cancellation – Obligation on the trader to give notice of that right – Contract void – . .
Cited – Robertson v Swift SC 9-Sep-2014
Notice Absence did not Remove Right to Cancel
The defendant had contracted to arrange the removal of the claimant’s household goods on moving house. The claimant cancelled the contract, made at his housel, but refused to pay the cancellation fee, saying that the contract not having been made at . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Consumer

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.342055

The Office Of Fair Trading v Foxtons Ltd: ChD 10 Jul 2009

The OFT alleged that certain standard terms in the defendant’s letting agent contracts were unfair. The agent had withdrawn the former terms, but relief was still sought on those terms and their effect, and as to the fairness of the new ones. The terms had sought continued remuneration after any tenancy renewal even if they had not been involved.
Held: The renewal commissions were not obvious from the agents literature, and nor would a landlord see this as part of the core of the service offered. The old terms were not exempt, and the new wording created no different presentation or effect. Furthermore, the terms relating to renewal commission are not drafted in plain and intelligible language, with the result that even if the renewal commission might otherwise have been part of the core bargain between the parties, it does not escape a fairness inquiry on that basis. The consumer landlord would be surprised by the effect of the clause in relation to renewals; the consumer’s notional lawyer would be likely to object to it and press for its deletion. These factors demonstrate the unfairness of it.

Judges:

Mann J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 1681 (Ch), Times 29-Jul-2009, [2009] 29 EG 98, [2009] NPC 92

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, Council Directive 93/13/EEC on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Director General of Fair Trading v First National Bank HL 25-Oct-2001
The House was asked whether a contractual provision for interest to run after judgment as well as before in a consumer credit contract led to an unfair relationship.
Held: The term was not covered by the Act, and was not unfair under the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Office of Fair Trading (OFT) v Abbey National Plc and Others SC 25-Nov-2009
The banks appealed against a ruling that the OFT could investigate the fairness or otherwise of their systems for charging bank customers for non-agreed items as excessive relative to the services supplied. The banks said that regulation 6(2) could . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.347488

Donnachie, Regina (on the Application of) v Cardiff Magistrates’ Court and Another: Admn 16 Mar 2009

A prosecutor for the purposes of the Trade Descriptions Act was the council and not an individual employee.

Judges:

Leveson LJ, Sweeney J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 489 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Trade Descriptions Act 1968

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Distinguished – Riley and Others v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 18-Oct-2016
The defendants appealed by case stated from convictions under the 2006 Act arising from the treatment of cows including at a slaughterhouse. Arguments were put that the prosecution was time barred.
Held: The court recognsed the limited role of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Consumer

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.323734

Overy v Paypal (Europe) Ltd: QBD 2 Mar 2012

The claimant had sought to conduct a competition to sell his house, the entry fees being collected by the defendant internet payment services provider. The defendant terminated the service to him, and he complained that that caused him substantial damages, and that the terms were unfair.
Held: ‘Mr Overy is not entitled to the protection of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 but . . even if he had, I would not have held that any of the individual contractual provisions in his contract with Paypal which he challenges would be unenforceable under those Regulations, save for the unrestricted power reserved by Paypal to terminate without cause and without notice and some of the provisions limiting or restricting liability for breach of contract. On the other hand, Mr Overy is entitled to the protection of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, though only two of the relevant contractual provisions are challenged on this basis. Under the Act, I have concluded that Paypal is nonetheless entitled to rely upon the exclusion of any liability for loss of profits, goodwill, business, contracts, revenue or anticipated savings under clause 2.5 of the User Agreement, and on the more general exclusion of liability for any indirect or consequential loss or damage.’

Judges:

Hegarty QC J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 2659 (QB), [2013] Bus LR D1

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Consumer, Banking

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.471776

Wallentin-Hermann v Alitalia Linee Aeree Italiane SpA: ECJ 22 Dec 2008

ECJ Carriage by air Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 Article 5 – Compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of cancellation of flights Exemption from the obligation to pay compensation Cancellation due to extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken.

Judges:

K. Lenaerts, President of Chamber and Judges T. von Danwitz, E. Juhisz, G. Arestis and J. Malenovski

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2008:771, [2009] Bus LR 1016, [2009] 2 CMLR 9, C-549/07, [2008] EUECJ C-549/07, [2009] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 406

Links:

Bailii, Times

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Applied – Jet2Com Ltd v Huzar CA 11-Jun-2014
The claimant passenger complained that he had not been compensated as required when his flight was delayed. The airline now appealed against a decision that a mechanical fault in the aircraft did not amount to exceptional circumstances so as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Consumer

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.280006

Baby Products Association and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Liverpool City Council: Admn 23 Nov 1999

The 1987 Act and its Regulations enabled a local authority with proper grounds for suspecting that a safety provision had been contravened in relation to goods, to issue a ‘suspension notice’ prohibiting a person on whom it was served from supplying those goods. It would be a criminal offence to breach that prohibition. The Council became concerned about the safety of certain models of baby walker. The suppliers disagreed. The Council decided to issue a press release to warn the public and to cause the recall of the product. The Council relied upon the general ancillary power in section 111 and the general power to publish information relating to its functions in section 142 of the 1972 Act.
Held: The Council’s decision was quashed. Lord Bingham accepted the submission that: ‘What, however, was impermissible was to make a public announcement having an intention and effect which could only be achieved by implementation of clear and particular procedures prescribed in an Act of Parliament when the effect of the announcement was to deny the companies the rights and protections which Parliament had enacted they should enjoy. So to act was to circumvent the provisions of the legislation and to act unlawfully.’
It did not matter that the procedures under the 1987 Act were cumbersome and not useful for an emergency; the solution to that was amendment not circumvention.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill CJ

Citations:

[1999] EWHC 832 (Admin), [2000] LGR 171, [2000] BLGR 171

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Protection Act 1987, Local Government Act 1972 111 142

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – British Bankers Association, Regina (on The Application of) v The Financial Services Authority and Another Admn 20-Apr-2011
The claimant sought relief by way of judicial review from a policy statement issued by the defendants regarding the alleged widespread misselling of payment protection insurance policies, and the steps to be taken to compensate the purchasers. They . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Administrative, Consumer

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279142

Ferguson v British Gas Trading Ltd: CA 10 Feb 2009

Harassment to Criminal Level needed to Convict

The claimant had been a customer of the defendant, but had moved to another supplier. She was then subjected to a constant stream of threatening letters which she could not stop despite re-assurances and complaints. The defendant now appealed against a refusal to strike out the claim of harassment.
Held: The appeal failed. The court considered her claim of harassment, and what level of seriousness was sufficient to come within the Act.
Jacob LJ said ‘British Gas says it has done nothing wrong; that it is perfectly all right for it to treat consumers in this way, at least if it is all just done by computer.’ and ‘I accept that the course of conduct must be grave before the offence or tort of harassment is proved . . It has never been suggested generally that the scope of the civil wrong is restricted because it is also a crime. What makes the wrong of harassment different and special is because, as Lord Nicholls and Lady Hale recognise, in life one has to put up with a certain amount of annoyance: things have got to be fairly severe before the law, civil or criminal, will intervene . . I am quite unable to conclude that the impugned conduct is incapable of satisfying the test. On the contrary I think, at the very least, that it is strongly arguable that it does. I ask myself whether a jury or bench of magistrates could reasonably conclude that the persistent and continued conduct here pleaded was on the wrong side of the line, as amounting to ‘oppressive and unacceptable conduct’. I am bound to say that I think they could.’
British Gas had ‘sought to downgrade it by saying that Ms Ferguson knew the claims and threats were unjustified. That is absurd: a victim of harassment will almost always know that it is unjustified. The Act is there to protect people against unjustified harassment. Indeed if the impugned conduct is justified it is unlikely to amount to harassment at all.
Mr Porter also made the point that the correspondence was computer generated and so, for some reason which I do not really follow, Ms Ferguson should not have taken it as seriously as if it had come from an individual. But real people are responsible for programming and entering material into the computer. It is British Gas’s system which, at the very least, allowed the impugned conduct to happen.
Moreover the threats and demands were to be read by a real person, not by a computer. A real person is likely to suffer real anxiety and distress if threatened in the way which Ms Ferguson was. And a real person is unlikely to take comfort from knowing that the claims and threats are unjustified or that they were sent by a computer system: that will not necessarily allay the fear that the threats will not be carried out. ‘

Judges:

Jacob LJ, Sedley LJ, Lloyd LJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 46, [2009] 3 All ER 304, [2010] 1 WLR 785

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Protection from Harassment Act 1997 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Lennard’s Carrying Company Limited v Asiatic Petroleum Company Limited HL 1915
The House was asked as to when the acts of an individual became those of his employer under section 502 (‘any loss or damage happening without (the ship owner’s) actual fault or privity’).
Held: Viscount Haldane LC said: ‘It must be upon the . .
Cited – Tesco Supermarkets Ltd v Nattrass HL 31-Mar-1971
Identification of Company’s Directing Mind
In a prosecution under the 1968 Act, the court discussed how to identify the directing mind and will of a company, and whether employees remained liable when proper instructions had been given to those in charge of a local store.
Held: ‘In the . .
Cited – Allen v London Borough of Southwark CA 12-Nov-2008
The claimant appealed against a strike out of his claim for harrassment after being subjected to five sets of possession proceedings by the defendant, each of which relied upon the same bad point.
Held: The Court refused to strike out a claim . .
Cited – Essendon Engineering v Maile 1982
. .
Cited – Director General of Fair Trading v Pioneer Concrete (UK) Ltd, sub nom Supply of Ready Mixed Concrete (No 2) HL 25-Nov-1994
The actions of company employees, acting in the course of their employment and in contempt may put the company employer in contempt also, and even though the company may have given explicit instructions that no infringing agreement should be entered . .
Cited – Conn v Sunderland CA 7-Nov-2007
The claimant said that he had been harassed by the respondent through an employee.
Held: Under the 1997 Act, the behaviour had to go beyond the regrettable to the unacceptable, and would be of such gravity as would sustain criminal liability . .
Cited – Regina v British Steel Plc CACD 31-Dec-1994
British Steel employed two sub-contractors to work in moving a steel tower under their supervision. One platform fell on one of the sub-contractors, killing him. British Steel claimed they had delegated their responsibilities under the Act, and were . .
Cited – Cambridgeshire County Council v Kama Admn 21-Nov-2006
. .
Cited – Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust HL 12-Jul-2006
Employer can be liable for Managers Harassment
The claimant employee sought damages, saying that he had been bullied by his manager and that bullying amounting to harassment under the 1997 Act. The employer now appealed a finding that it was responsible for a tort committed by a manager, saying . .
Cited – Meridian Global Funds Management Asia Ltd v Securities Commission PC 26-Jun-1995
(New Zealand) The New Zealand statute required a holder of specified investments to give notice of its holding to a regulator as soon as it became aware of its holding. Unbeknown to any others in the company apart from one colleague, its chief . .

Cited by:

Cited – Veakins v Kier Islington Ltd CA 2-Dec-2009
The claimant alleged that her manager at work had harassed her. The court, applying Conn, had found that none of the acts complained of were sufficiently serious to amount to criminal conduct, and had rejected the claim.
Held: The claimant’s . .
Cited – Rayment v Ministry of Defence QBD 18-Feb-2010
The claimant sought damages alleging harassment by officers employed by the defendant. An internal investigation had revealed considerable poor behaviour by the senior officers, and that was followed by hostile behaviour. The defendant had put up . .
Cited – Calland v Financial Conduct Authority CA 13-Mar-2015
The claimant appealed against the striking out of his claim of harassment against the Authority who had contacted him in an intended review of pensions mis-selling. They had contacted him once by letter, once by telephone and once by e-mail.
Cited – Gerrard and Another v Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Ltd and Another QBD 27-Nov-2020
The claimants, a solicitor and his wife, sought damages in harassment and data protection, against a party to proceedings in which he was acting professionally, and against the investigative firm instructed by them. The defendants now requested the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Consumer

Leading Case

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.282601

Enfield London Borough Council v Argos Ltd: Admn 24 Jun 2008

The defendant company had been accused of selling a bladed article to a youth making a test purchase. The prosecutor now appealed by way of case stated raising the question as to whether a reasonable precaution taken after a test case conducted by the trading standards of a local authority necessarily discloses a failure to take all reasonable precautions before.

Judges:

Moses LJ, Goldring J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 2597 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 141A

Citing:

Cited – Naish v Gore QBD 1971
The justices had come to the conclusion that reasonable precautions had been taken by the shopkeeper, and therefore that the defence in section 24 was made out.
Held: Lord Widgery CJ said: ‘Accordingly, it seems to me that the proper disposal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Consumer

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.277537

Ilsinger v Martin Dreschers: ECJ 11 Sep 2008

ECJ (Area Of Freedom, Security and Justice) Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 Article 15 (1) (c) Jurisdiction over consumer contracts Promise of consumer gain Conclusion of a contract Consumer protection Continuity between the Brussels Convention and the Regulation (EC) No 44/2001

Citations:

C-180/06, [2008] EUECJ C-180/06 – O

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Opinion – Ilsinger v Martin Dreschers ECJ 14-May-2009
Jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters ‘ Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 ‘ Jurisdiction over consumer contracts ‘ Entitlement of a consumer to whom misleading advertising has been sent to seek payment, in judicial proceedings, of the prize which he . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276381

Office of Fair Trading v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc and others: CA 22 Mar 2006

The OFT appealed a decision denyng that a credit card issuer had connected lender liability in respect of purchase by card holders abroad.
Held: The company took the benefit of having its card accepted by suppliers abroad, and therefore also had the liability sought.

Judges:

Waller, Smith and Moore-Bick LJJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 268, Times 07-Apr-2006, [2006] 3 WLR 452, [2007] QB 1

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Credit Act 1974 75

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Office of Fair Trading v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc and others ComC 12-Nov-2004
The OFT failed in its attempt to make the defendant credit card company liable under the 1974 Act for purchases abroad. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Office of Fair Trading v Lloyds TSB Bank PlC and Others HL 31-Oct-2007
The House was asked whether the liability of a credit card company under the 1974 Act applied where the contract was performed abroad and subject to foreign law.
Held: The principle which disapplied an English statute in an extra-territorial . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Banking

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.239220

Gysbrechts And Santurel Inter (Free Movement Of Goods): ECJ 17 Jul 2008

ECJ Articles 28 EC to 30 EC Directive 97/7/EC Consumer protection in distance contracts Period for withdrawal Prohibition on requiring from a consumer a deposit or payment before the end of the period for withdrawal

Citations:

C-205/07, [2008] EUECJ C-205/07

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EC Directive 97/7/EC

European, Consumer

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.271123

Trident Turboprop (Dublin) Ltd v First Flight Couriers Ltd: Comc 17 Jul 2008

Trident entered into Aircraft Operating Lease Agreements in identical terms with First Flight in respect of two ATP model aircraft. The leases represented the culmination of negotiations between a representative of the manufacturer, BAE Systems Regional Aircraft Limited (‘BAE’), and representatives of First Flight and were signed by a representative of BAE on behalf of Trident. Each provided for delivery to take place at Southend airport. Application for summary judgment under aircraft leasing agreements – no payment of rent. The defendant argued that the clause disallowing them from alleging any misrepresentation failed to satisfy the reasonableness requirement under the 1977 Act.
Held: The leases fell within section 26 and the agreements were exempt. Judgement was given for the claimant.

Judges:

Aikens J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1686 (Comm), [2009] 1 All ER (Comm) 16, [2008] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 581

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 26

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal From – Trident Turboprop (Dublin) Ltd v First Flight Couriers Ltd CA 2-Apr-2009
The appellant entered into two aircraft leasing agreements but were unable to maintain payments. They appealed against rejection of their argument that the agreements were not exempt from the controls under the 1977 Act by being international supply . .
Cited – Wright and Another (Liquidators of SHB Realisations Ltd) v The Prudential Assurance Company Ltd ChD 6-Mar-2018
IVA is a special form of contract
Liquidators asked the court whether sums sought by the insolvent company’s landlords were payable and or provable. Under an IVA, the copany had been paying reduced rents, but the arrangement document provided that the full rents would be restored on . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Consumer

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.271150

Conister Trust Ltd v John Hardman and Co: CA 21 Jul 2008

The court was asked whether an agreement by the defendant solicitors under a personal injury litigation funding scheme, to discharge a client’s ‘remaining liability’ under a loan agreement applies on its true construction where the loan agreement is unenforceable by virtue of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.
Held: In the context of the panel solicitor’s agreement in question, ‘remaining liability’ imported something which was enforceable. The creditor had no right of recovery against the solicitors.

Judges:

Lawrence Collins LJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 841, [2009] CCLR 4

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Credit Act 1974

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – McGuffick v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc ComC 6-Oct-2009
Requirements for Enforcing Consumer Loan Agreement
The claimant challenged the validity of a loan agreement with his bank as a regulated consumer credit agreement. After default, the lender failed to satisfy a request for a copy of the agreement under section 77. The bank said that though it could . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Costs, Consumer

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.270892

X v Kuoni Travel Ltd: QBD 30 Nov 2016

The Claimant, Mrs X, sought damages for personal injury and other losses arising out of a sexual assault (including rape), on 17th July 2010 during a 14 day all-inclusive package holiday which the Claimant had purchased from the Defendant, Kuoni Travel Ltd, which included accommodation at the [A] Hotel in Sri Lanka.
Held: ‘holiday arrangements’ in clause 5.10(b) of the regulations did not include a member of the maintenance staff conducting a guest to reception. Obiter, Kuoni would in any event have been able to rely on the statutory defence under regulation 15(2)(c)(ii) because the assault was an event which could not have been foreseen or forestalled (by inference by the hotel) even with all due care, and the hotel would not have been vicariously liable for the rape and assault as a matter of Sri Lankan law, which it was agreed was the same as English law for these purposes.

Judges:

McKenna HHJ

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 3090 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – X v Kuoni Travel Ltd CA 26-Apr-2018
The claimant sought damages after being sexually assaulted by a hotel worker on her holiday in Sri Lanka. She said that the incident was an improper performance of the contract and in breach of the 1992 Regulations. She appealed from rejection of . .
At first instance – X v Kuoni Travel Ltd SC 24-Jul-2019
The claimant had been raped by a member of staff at the hotel in Sri Lanka booked through the respondent travel company. She now appealed from dismissal of the claim.
Held: Questions were referred to the ECJ, namely: ‘(1) Where there has been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Torts – Other, Consumer

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.572341

Black Horse Ltd v Speak and Another: QBD 21 Jul 2010

The court considered a case involving the selling of payment protection policies by lenders. The defendants said that since the bank had required them to take out the policy, its cost should have been included in the total charge for credit. Since it had not been, the agreement was irredemably unenforceable.
Held: The insurance had not been a condition of the loan, but it had been recommended. Accordingly the claim by the lenders stood.

Judges:

Waksman QC J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 1866 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Credit Act (Agreements) Regulations 1983, Consumer Credit Act 1974 9 60, Consumer Credit (Total Charge for Credit Regulations) 1980 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Barnes and Another v Black Horse Ltd QBD 31-May-2011
The claimants sought repayment by the bank of sums paid to them for Payment Protection Insurance policies sold to them in connection with loans made by the bank. The Bank now resisted an application for leave to amend the particulars of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Banking

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.421252

Evans v Cherry Tree Finance Ltd and Another: CA 6 Feb 2008

The defendant appealed a finding that a term in its mortgage loan agreement imposing a substantial penalty on the claimant on the redemption of a mortgage was void under the Regulations. The company said that the loan was a business loan.

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 331

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1991

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Consumer, Contract

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.270512

JP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation: Comc 27 May 2008

The company alleged negligence by its financial advisers.
Held: Gloster J said that the absence of a written advisory agreement is a strong pointer against the existence of a free-standing duty of care to give investment advice.
Gloster J said: ‘terms which simply define the basis upon which services will be rendered and confirm the basis upon which parties are transacting business are not subject to section 2 of UCTA. Otherwise, every contract which contains contractual terms defining the extent of each party’s obligations would have to satisfy the requirement of reasonableness.’

Judges:

Gloster J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1186 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – JP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation ComC 14-Mar-2005
The defendants had invested money through the claimants, but had suffered severe losses. The claimants sought a declaration that they had no liability for such losses. The defendants counterclaimed that the claimants were liable in negligence, . .
See Also – JP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation CA 20-Dec-2005
The defendants appealed against an order striking out four paragraphs of its defence and counterclaim. . .
See Also – JP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation CA 2-Mar-2006
The parties disputed the attempt to strike out part of the defendant’s claim relating to shipping losses. . .
See Also – JP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation ComC 3-Nov-2006
. .

Cited by:

See Also – JP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation and others ComC 25-Jul-2008
. .
See Also – JP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corp ComC 21-Nov-2008
. .
See Also – JP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corp ComC 20-Feb-2009
The court heard an application for leave to appeal against orders. . .
Cited – Raiffeisen Zentralbank Osterreich Ag v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc ComC 11-Jun-2010
The court was asked whether certain provisions fell within section 3 of the Misrepresentation Act.
Held: Christopher Clarke J referred to dicta of Gloster J and said: ‘In Springwell Gloster J took the view that terms which simply defined the . .
Appeal from – Springwell Navigation Corporation v JP Morgan Chase Bank and Others CA 1-Nov-2010
The court was asked as to whether representations has been made.
Held: Aikens LJ referred to a provision stating ‘no representation or warranty, express or implied, is or will be made . . in or in relation to such documents or information’, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Consumer

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.269732

TRM Copy Centres (UK) Ltd and others v Lanwall Services Ltd: CA 17 Apr 2008

The court declined an appeal against an order that copier hire agreements were not regulated under the 1974 Act.

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 382, [2008] BusLR 1231

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Credit Act 1974 15

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – TRM Copy Centres (UK) Ltd and others v Lanwall Services Ltd QBD 18-Jul-2007
The court considered as a preliminary issue the alleged inducement by the Defendant of breach of contract on the part of various customers of the Claimants.
Held: The Location Agreements were not consumer hire agreements within the meaning of . .

Cited by:

Appeal From – TRM Copy Centres (UK) Ltd and Others v Lanwall Services Ltd HL 17-Jun-2009
Each party contracted hire copiers to shops and offices. The claimant said that the defendant had interfered with their contracts by substituting their equipment. The defendants said that the claimants’ contracts were controlled by the 1974 Act, but . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Contract

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.266960

Mediaprint Zeitungs Und Zeitschriftenverlag: ECJ 9 Nov 2010

Directive 2005/29/EC – Unfair commercial practices – National legislation laying down a prohibition in principle on commercial practices making the offer of bonuses to consumers subject to the purchase of goods or services

Citations:

[2010] EUECJ C-540/08, [2011] 1 CMLR 48

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

Opinion – Mediaprint Zeitungs Und Zeitschriftenverlag ECJ 24-Mar-2010
(Opinion) Environment And Consumers – Directive 2005/29 / EC – Harmonization – Consumer protection – Unfair commercial practices of undertakings – Joint offers – Concept of commercial practice – National provision prohibiting the offering of free . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.630995

Mediaprint Zeitungs Und Zeitschriftenverlag: ECJ 24 Mar 2010

(Opinion) Environment And Consumers – Directive 2005/29 / EC – Harmonization – Consumer protection – Unfair commercial practices of undertakings – Joint offers – Concept of commercial practice – National provision prohibiting the offering of free benefits accompanying periodicals – Protection of media pluralism and competition

Citations:

C-540/08, [2010] EUECJ C-540/08

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Opinion – Mediaprint Zeitungs Und Zeitschriftenverlag ECJ 9-Nov-2010
Directive 2005/29/EC – Unfair commercial practices – National legislation laying down a prohibition in principle on commercial practices making the offer of bonuses to consumers subject to the purchase of goods or services . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.416406

Rampion et Godard, epouse Rampion v Franfinance SA et K par K SAS: ECJ 29 Mar 2007

ECJ Directive 87/102 / EEC Credit for consumption interdependence between the credit agreement and the contract of sale of goods or services financed Terms mention goods or services financed in the credit agreement Applicability of office by the national court of the domestic provisions on the interdependence between the credit agreement and the sales contract adopted in transposition of the Directive

Citations:

C-429/05, [2007] EUECJ C-429/05, [2008] Bus LR 715, [2007] ECR I-8017

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Environment, Consumer

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.251130

J and H Ritchie Ltd v Lloyd Ltd: HL 7 Mar 2007

The appellants had bought a seed drill from the respondents. It had been repossessed but sold as near new. A fault was noticed after two days use, and it was returned. The defendants repaired it without agreeing this with the appellant, and then refused to say what the repair had been. The claimant now appealed the refusal of his claim that at the time he had purported to reject the machine, it was in a proper state of repair, and was fit for purpose.
Held: The appeal succeeded. It was proper to imply a term to fill a gap left by the 1979 Act when dealing with returned goods and the loss of the right of rejection. Just what term is to be implied may vary with the circumstances. Until a buyer can be said to have accepted the goods, he has not lost the right to reject them. In this case the nature of the fault was not known to the buyer. He was not in a position to make an informed choice as to whether to accept the goods. The respondents had not behaved in accordance with sensible or reasonable commercial practice by refusing to state the nature of the defect, and that failure was in breach of the terms implied on the machine’s return for inspection.

Judges:

Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, Lord Mance

Citations:

[2007] UKHL 9, Times 08-Mar-2007

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Sale of Goods Act 1979 35(6)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – J and H Ritchie Ltd v Lloyd Ltd SCS 11-Jan-2005
The buyers sought repayment of the sum paid by them for agricultural machinery purchased from the respondent. The machinery was bought after a repossession, but returned when a vibration was found. The defendants repaired the machine, but would not . .
Cited – William Morton and Co v Muir Brothers and Co 1907
Lord McLaren said: ‘The conception of an implied condition is one with which we are familiar in relation to contracts of every description, and if we seek to trace any such implied conditions to their source, it will be found that in almost every . .
Cited – Liverpool City Council v Irwin HL 31-Mar-1976
The House found it to be an implied term of a tenancy agreement that the lessor was to be responsible for repairing and lighting the common parts of the building of which the premises formed part. In analysing the different types of contract case in . .
Cited – Clegg v Olle Andersson (T/A Nordic Marine) CA 11-Mar-2003
Right oReject Survived Attempted Repair
The claimant agreed to purchase a yacht from the defendants with a keel to the manufacturer’s standard specifications. The keel actually installed was rather heavier. After correspondence, the claimant rejected the yacht and required the return of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Contract, Consumer

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.249892

Chappell and Co Ltd v Nestle Co Ltd: HL 18 Jun 1959

The defendants sought to rely on section 8 in defence to a claim for copyright infringement. They had manufactured and sold recordings of a work whose copyright was owned by the plaintiffs.They had given notice but had been told that the distribution as a sales promotion for chocolate was not retail sale within the section.
Held: It was a retail sale: ‘It is a sale to a consuming member of the public, and I know of no other factor which distinguishes a retail sale from other sales. ‘ The issue as whether the price was an ‘ordinary retal selling price’ and whether it is contended that . . the sale ‘ bears no resemblance at all to the transaction to which . . the section is pointing ‘, or that the three wrappers form part of the selling price and are incapable of valuation. Nor is there any need to take what, with respect, I think is a somewhat artificial view of a simple transaction. What can be easier than for a manufacturer to limit his sales to those members of the public who fufil the qualification of being this or doing that? It may be assumed that the manufacturer’s motive is his own advantage. It is possible that he achieves his object. But that does not mean that the sale is not a retail sale to which the section applies or that the ordinary retail selling price is not the price at which the record is ordinarily sold, in this case 1s. 6d.’

Judges:

Viscount Simonds, Lord Reid, Lord Tucker, Lord Keith of Avonholm, Lord Somervell of Harrow

Citations:

[1959] UKHL 1, [1960] AC 87

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Copyright Act 1956 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property, Consumer

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.248534

Elisa Maria Mostaza Claro v Centro Movil Milenium SL: ECJ 26 Oct 2006

ECJ Directive 93/13/EEC – Unfair terms in consumer contracts – Failure to raise the unfair nature of a term during arbitration proceedings – Possibility of raising that objection in the context of an action brought against the arbitration award.

Citations:

C-168/05, [2006] EUECJ C-168/05, [2006] ECR I-10421, [2007] Bus LR 60, [2007] CEC 290, [2007] 1 CMLR 22

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Office of Fair Trading v Foxtons Ltd ChD 17-Jul-2008
Complaint was made that the Foxtons standard terms of acting in residential lettings were unfair. Foxtons objected to the jurisdiction of the Claimant to intervene.
Held: On a challenge to an individual contract, the court would be able to see . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Consumer, Contract

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.245656

Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd v HM Courts Service (South West Region, Devon and Cornwall Area) and others: Admn 14 Jun 2006

The defendants sought judicial review of decisions by magistrates to substitute out of time properly named companies as defendants in cases under the 1990 Act.
Held: The court had repeated the error made in the Marco case, by substituting as a defendant a party not before the court. The effect of the district judge’s decision was, in my view, to prefer a charge against a new defendant outside the statutory time limit.

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 1749 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Food Safety Act 1990 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Marco (Croydon) Ltd v Metropolitan Police Commissioner QBD 1983
The defendant company traded as A and J Bull Containers. They hired out a builder’s skip which was left out, unlit, on the highway at night. A cyclist rode into it and died. An information was laid against ‘A J Bull Ltd’, charging an offence under . .
Cited – Regina v Greater Manchester Justices Ex Parte Aldi Gmbh and Co Kg; Aldi Gmbh v Mulvenna QBD 28-Dec-1994
The substitution of a defendant in a case before the magistrates was challengeable where it was not a mere mistake in the name of the defendant. The wholesalers who should have been named had been in correspondence for some time with the prosecutor . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Magistrates, Crime

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.243311

Tesco Stores Ltd and Another v P (A Minor) and Another: CA 12 Apr 2006

The claimant, a 13 month old boy, had by mistake drunk from a bottle of dishwasher powder sold and manufactured by the various defendants. The bottle had a child resistant closure. The court considered how much force the boy would have been able to apply, and how much was needed.
Held: The question was whether the ability to open the bottle demonstrated a defect in it. ‘The test is, and is only, ‘what persons generally are entitled to expect’ and ‘ they were entitled to expect that the bottle would be more difficult to open than if it had an ordinary screwtop. ‘ The test could not be made more specific. In this case there was no breach of the 1987 Act. The appeal succeeded. The defendants were not liable.

Judges:

Laws LJ, Wilson LJ, Sir Paul Kennedy

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 393

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Protection Act 1987 2, Chemical (Hazard Information and Packaging for Supply) Regulations 1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Consumer

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.240363

Declan O’Byrne v Sanofi Pasteur MSD Ltd, formerly Aventis Pasteur MSD Ltd, Sanofi Pasteur SA: ECJ 9 Feb 2006

ECJ Directive 85/374/EEC – Liability for defective products – Definition of -putting into circulation- of the product – Supply by the producer to a wholly owned subsidiary.

Citations:

C-127/04, [2006] EUECJ C-127/04, Times 15-Feb-2006

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Skov AEG v Bilka Lavprisvarehus A/S ECJ 10-Jan-2006
ECJ Directive 85/374/EEC – Liability for defective products – Liability of the supplier of a defective product.
The class of persons liable against whom an injured person is entitled to bring an action under . .

Cited by:

At ECJ – O’Byrne v Aventis Pasteur MSD Ltd QBD 20-Oct-2006
The claimant sought damages under the 1967 Act asserting injury from a drug sold by the defendant. Proceedings had been mistakenly commenced against Aventis Pasteur MSD Ltd within the limitation period, but outside the limitation period, it was . .
At ECJ – O’Byrne v Aventis Pasteur Sa CA 9-Oct-2007
The claimant had made a mistake in naming the defendant company, but had intended the company which it now requested the court to substitute as defendant. The limitation period had expired.
Held: The substitution was necessary to decide the . .
At ECJ – OB v Aventis Pasteur SA HL 11-Jun-2008
The claimant had been vaccinated with a HIB vaccine. He was severely injured and it was said that the vaccine was the cause, and a claim made under the 1987 Act. Originally the claim was made against a UK company, but it should have been against . .
At ECJ (1) – Aventis Pasteur v O’Byrne (Environment And Consumers) ECJ 2-Dec-2009
Europa Directive 85/374/EEC – Liability for defective products Articles 3 and 11 Mistake in the classification of ‘producer’ Judicial proceedings – Application for substitution of the producer for the original . .
At ECJ – O’Byrne v Aventis Pasteur Sa CA 9-Oct-2007
Whether two applications for leave to appeal between the same parties should be heard together. . .
At ECJ (1) – O’Byrne v Aventis Pasteur Sa SC 26-May-2010
The claimant wished to claim damages after suffering serious injury as a child having been vaccinated with a drug manufactured by a defendant (APMSD). The defendant had relied on a defence saying that the limitation period under the Directive was 10 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Consumer

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238386

Skov AEG v Bilka Lavprisvarehus A/S: ECJ 10 Jan 2006

ECJ Directive 85/374/EEC – Liability for defective products – Liability of the supplier of a defective product.
The class of persons liable against whom an injured person is entitled to bring an action under the system of liability laid down by the Directive is defined in articles 1 and 3 of the Directive.

Citations:

[2006] EUECJ C-402/03, [2006] ECR I-00199

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 85/374/EEC

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Declan O’Byrne v Sanofi Pasteur MSD Ltd, formerly Aventis Pasteur MSD Ltd, Sanofi Pasteur SA ECJ 9-Feb-2006
ECJ Directive 85/374/EEC – Liability for defective products – Definition of -putting into circulation- of the product – Supply by the producer to a wholly owned subsidiary. . .
Cited – OB v Aventis Pasteur SA HL 11-Jun-2008
The claimant had been vaccinated with a HIB vaccine. He was severely injured and it was said that the vaccine was the cause, and a claim made under the 1987 Act. Originally the claim was made against a UK company, but it should have been against . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Personal Injury

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.237652

Ynos Kft (Environment and Consumers): ECJ 10 Jan 2006

ECJ Article 234 EC – Directive 93/13/EEC – Consumers – Unfair terms – National legislation adapted to comply with the directive after conclusion by a non-member State of an association agreement with the European Communities and before that State acceded to the European Union – Lack of jurisdiction of the Court

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2006:9, [2006] ECR I-371, C-302/04, [2006] EUECJ C-302/04

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 93/13/EEC

Jurisdiction:

European

Consumer, Environment

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.237654

Regina, ex parte International Air Transport Association, European Low Fares Airline Association v Department for Transport: ECJ 10 Jan 2006

ECJ Carriage by air – Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 – Articles 5, 6 and 7 -Compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights – Validity – Interpretation of Article 234 EC

Judges:

V Skouris, P

Citations:

C-344/04, [2006] EUECJ C-344/04, Times 16-Jan-2006, [2006] ECR 1-0000, [2006] 2 CMLR 20

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 261/2004

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Mote v Regina CACD 21-Dec-2007
The defendant appealed his convictions for offences relating to the claiming of benefits, saying that he was immune from prosecution as a member of the European Parliament, and that the verdicts were inconsistent with acquittals on other charges. . .
Cited – Dawson v Thomson Airways Ltd CA 19-Jun-2014
The claimant’s flight had been delayed for six hours. The airline said that the claim having been made outside the two year period applicable under the Montreal convention, no compensation was payable.
Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. ‘We . .
Cited – Stott v Thomas Cook Tour Operators Ltd and Another CA 7-Feb-2012
The claimants were disabled and, despite promises, had not had their seating needs met when flying with the defendants. . .
Cited – Stott v Thomas Cook Tour Operators Ltd SC 5-Mar-2014
The Court was asked whether a person may recover damages for discomfort and injury to feelings caused by a breach of the 2007 Regulations, which implement EC Regulation No. 1107/2006. The disabled passenger claimant alleged failure by the defendant . .
Cited – Lumsdon and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Legal Services Board SC 24-Jun-2015
The appellant, barristers and solicitors, challenged the respondent’s approval of alterations to their regulatory arrangements, under Part 3 of Schedule 4 to the 2007 Act. The alterations gave effect to the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Consumer

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.237645

United Kingdom v Commission (Environment and Consumers): ECFI 23 Nov 2005

ECFI Environment – Directive 2003/87/EC – Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading – Proposed amendment to national allocation plan – Refusal by the Commission – Action for annulment.

Citations:

T-178/05, [2005] EUECJ T-178/05

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2003/87/EC

European, Consumer, Environment

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.235250

Schulte v Deutsche Bausparkasse Badenia AG: ECJ 25 Oct 2005

ECJ Environment and Consumers – Consumer protection – Doorstep selling – Purchase of immovable property – Investment financed by a secured loan – Right of cancellation – Effects of cancellation.
‘when hearing a case between individuals, the national court is required, when applying the provisions of domestic law adopted for the purpose of transposing obligations laid down by a directive, to consider the whole body of rules of national law and to interpret them, so far as possible, in the light of the wording and purpose of the directive in order to achieve an outcome consistent with the objective pursued by the directive . .’ and ‘If the Bank had informed Mr and Mrs Schulte of their right of cancellation under the HWiG at the correct time, they would have had seven days to change their minds about concluding the loan agreement. If they had chosen then to cancel it, it is common ground that, given the link between the loan agreement and the purchase contract, the latter would not have been concluded.
In a situation where the Bank has not complied with the obligation to inform the consumer incumbent on it under Art.4 of the Directive, if the consumer must repay the loan under German law as construed in the case law of the Bundesgerichtshof, he bears the risks entailed by financial investments such as those at issue in the main proceedings . .
However, in a situation such as that in the main proceedings, the consumer could have avoided exposure to those risks if he had been informed in time of his right of cancellation.
In those circumstances, the Directive requires Member States to adopt appropriate measures so that the consumer does not have to bear the consequences of the materialisation of those risks. The Member States must therefore ensure that, in those circumstances, a bank which has not complied with its obligation to inform the consumer bears the consequences of the materialisation of those risks so that the obligation to protect consumers is safeguarded.
Accordingly, in a situation where, if the Bank had informed the consumer of his right of cancellation, the consumer would have been able to avoid exposure to the risks inherent in investments such as those at issue in the main proceedings, Art.4 requires Member States to ensure that their legislation protects consumers who have been unable to avoid exposure to such risks, by adopting suitable measures to allow them to avoid bearing the consequences of the materialisation of those risks.’

Judges:

V Skouris, P

Citations:

C-350/03, [2005] EUECJ C-350/03, [2005] ECR I-9215, [2006] All ER (EC) 420, [2006] 1 CMLR 11, [2006] CEC 115

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Robertson v Swift SC 9-Sep-2014
Notice Absence did not Remove Right to Cancel
The defendant had contracted to arrange the removal of the claimant’s household goods on moving house. The claimant cancelled the contract, made at his housel, but refused to pay the cancellation fee, saying that the contract not having been made at . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Consumer

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.231494

Bryen and Langley Ltd v Boston: CA 29 Jul 2005

The special facts surrounding the agreement of the standard term at issue were such that the court held that it could not possibly say that there had been a breach of the principle of fair dealing and that rendered it unnecessary for the court to consider whether on an objective assessment, the term caused a significant imbalance between the parties to the detriment of the consumer.

Judges:

Lord Justice Clarke Lord Justice Pill Mr Justice Rimer

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 973, [2005] BLR 508

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Bryen and Langley Limited v Boston TCC 4-Nov-2004
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National Plc and seven Others ComC 24-Apr-2008
The Office sought a declaration that the respondent and other banks were subject to the provisions of the Regulations in their imposition of bank charges to customer accounts, and in particular as to the imposition of penalties or charges for the . .
Cited – Office of Fair Trading v Foxtons Ltd ChD 17-Jul-2008
Complaint was made that the Foxtons standard terms of acting in residential lettings were unfair. Foxtons objected to the jurisdiction of the Claimant to intervene.
Held: On a challenge to an individual contract, the court would be able to see . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction, Contract, Consumer

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.229148

London North Securities Ltd v Meadows, and Meadows: CA 27 Jul 2005

Judges:

Lord Justice Waller Lord Justice Lloyd The Master of the Rolls

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 956

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Credit Act 1974

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Southern Pacific Mortgage Ltd v Heath CA 5-Nov-2009
The court considered the effect of an agreement within the 1974 Act falling into more than one category of agreement. Part was used to be used for the repayment of an existing mortgage (restricted use credit), and part was unrestricted. The question . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Banking

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.229026

Ministero della Salute v Coordinamento delle associazioni per la difesa dell’ambiente e dei diritti degli utenti e dei consumatori (Codacons), Federconsumatori: ECJ 26 May 2005

ECJ Regulation (EC) No 1139/98 – Article 2(2)(b) – Additional labelling requirement for foodstuffs – Compulsory particulars concerning the presence of material derived from genetically modified organisms (GMOs) – Genetically modified soya beans and maize – Exemption from the requirement in the case of adventitious presence not exceeding a particular level – Foodstuffs intended for particular nutritional use – Infants and young children – Whether derogation applies – Precautionary principle.

Citations:

C-132/03, [2005] EUECJ C-132/03

Links:

Bailii

European, Consumer

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225308

Broadwick Financial Services Limited v Spencer, Spencer: CA 30 Jan 2002

The respondents appealed an order for possession under a legal charge which they argued was an extortionate credit bargain, and had been improperly executed and was unenforceable. The appellants were ‘non-status borrowers’.
Held: A concession letter was not intended to over-ride other clear descriptions of the appellant’s obligations. The judge had compared the interest rate charged with other rates charged to non-status borrowers, rather than with interest rates at large. That was correct for this particular market. The interest rates were not extortionate, and nor did the right to vary the interest rate contradict fair dealing. The redemption calculation was based upon the rules. The rules had been criticised, but the clause was common, and not extortionate for the time. ‘The cap imposed by the administrative agreements has not operated in an extortionate way, because the margins between the Halifax rate, for example, and the Claimants are not so wide as to be capable of being categorised as harsh and oppressive within the ambit of Section 138.’ Appeal refused.

Judges:

Lord Justice Auld, Lord Justice Robert Walker, And, Lord Justice Dyson

Citations:

Gazette 15-Mar-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 35, [2002] 1 All ER 446

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Credit Act 1974 138, Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 60(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Paragon Finance Plc v Pender and Another CA 27-Jun-2005
The defendants had purchased their property from the local authority with the support of a loan from the claimants. The defendants fell into arrears but now sought to resist possession on the basis that the claimant, in securitising their portfolio . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Land

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.167538