Examine how kennett and coles handled the matter- Business Law
OBJECTIVE OF ASSIGNMENT:
(a) To introduce you to the way in which Australian law deals with businesses which breach their contracts with consumers AND SUPPLIERS.
(b) To show how, while contract law is private law (between private persons, as compared to public law – government and the citizen), governments re steadily developing an armory of law which can deal with even the largest companies foolish enough to ignore their obligations under consumer contracts.
(c) To show how attitudes to law, especially contract law, have and are continuing to change, and the old notion in contract law, ‘caveat emptor’ (let the buyer beware), no longer apply in many cases.
(d) To show how business persons who ignore the nexis between contract law and consumer law do so at great risk, and how easy it is to breach the law
TOPIC – Jeff Kennett was a former Premier of Victoria. His first clash with Coles concerned his attempt to buy bread at one of their stores advertised as ‘baked fresh daily’. When he opened the package, he found a packing slip that confirmed the bread had been par-baked (half baked in preparation for export) in Ireland months previously and exported to Australia where it was advertised as freshly baked on the premises.
Task 1: Examine how Kennett and Coles handled the matter. What was wrong with selling bread that had been incorrectly described? What agreement, if any, did Kennett and Coles reach? Especially read the materials and commentary listed in the attached reading Guide. They are very helpful. Was anyone charged with an offense, especially say under the Competition and Consumer Act 2010?
No sooner had Kennett settled with Coles on the bread matter when Coles suppliers complained that they were the victims of scheme by Coles to force them to pay loadings on projected sales to help Coles recover losses. The second aspect of Kennett’s involvement is contained in the ACCC against Coles of head in 2014.
Task 2: This matter concerns the ACCC case mentioned above. Coles retained Kennett as its arbitrator in the matter, and Kennett was empowered to decide the outcome of the suppliers’ case. Kennett decided strongly in favour of the suppliers.
What is meant by abuse of market power? What was the nature of the allegation against Coles which Kennett now had to deal with in his capacity as Cole’s arbitrator. How did the matter get to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission? Was Coles use of Kennett simply a case of ‘hold your friends close and your enemies closer.’
In Task 2, look closely at the comments on the ACCC v Coles case in the attached readings. They are grouped quite separately from the others.
Outline-
TOPIC
INTRODUCTION
This paper explores the nexis between the private law of contracts and the public law of consumer protection. It explores the nexis in two ways: from the consumer viewpoint and from the supplier viewpoint.
Who are the main parties in the cases below? What is the key legislation? Always remember that your assignment must begin with an introduction, and must finish with a Conclusion.
ARGUMENT
The Nexis Discussed
What about the nexis between :Private contract and public law?
Why has the concept of ‘Caveat Emptor’ faded in recent years?
Why is consumer confidence important. The evolution of democratic rights and the power of the vote.
What was the role of the ACCC (Australian Competition and Consumer Commission) in the case? Why does the State feel it must intervene on occasaoins in what are essentially private law matters
What is the name of the Act under which the ACCC took action.
What is the problem when one party to a contract is much more powerful than another?
The Irish Bread Case
Was this a contract?
What was the case about? Particularly read the reading lists as these contain some good analysis by consumer journalists and the like (ie by informed parties).
Was Kennett right when he took exception to the discretion of the Irish bread published by Coles. ‘Fresh bread baked today’.
Why is accurate description important.
The confidence of the consumer.
What did Kennett see as the key features of the case. What he disturbed by the whole issue?
What did the judge see as the worst features of the case.
Market power – Coles v’s its Suppliers
What was Kennett’s role in this case? He is an arbitrator on behalf of Coles?
What was the case about? Make sure you understand it?
Why is it called ‘an abuse of market power’.
What is the key or underlying problem of abuses of market power. Why are the regulators keen to outlaw conduct that comprises an abuse of market power?
What were the features of the case that were disturbing?
CONCLUSION
Your conclusion must be clear and definite. A paper without a conclusion is not complete and will be treated as being incomplete. Government intervention in private contracts does have an important role. Government intervention is an equaliser. Equalisers make for confident consumers. Contractual rights are reinforced for the betterment of all participants in an economy.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Absolutely vital.
2000 words.
10 references.
