The manager of a shop was not necessarily liable for a misleading price indication in the shop. There had been a national price reduction advertisement. A customer came into the shop to try to buy a television under the scheme. The store manager refused. The manager was charged with and convicted of giving misleading information as to price.
Held: The appeal was allowed. Looking at statements made in Parliament on the passing of the Act, it could be seen that employees as such were exempted from liability for statements made by their employers.
Judges:
Lord Griffiths, Lord Emslie, Lord Roskill, Lord Ackner, Lord Lowry
Citations:
Gazette 10-Feb-1993, [1993] WLR 1 HL, [1991] UKHL 11, [1993] AC 583, [1993] All ER 299
Links:
Statutes:
Consumer Protection Act 1987 20(1)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart HL 26-Nov-1992
Reference to Parliamentary Papers behind Statute
The inspector sought to tax the benefits in kind received by teachers at a private school in having their children educated at the school for free. Having agreed this was a taxable emolument, it was argued as to whether the taxable benefit was the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Consumer, Crime
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.88271