“Businesses that sell goods and services to consumers over the internet should face criminal penalties if they fail to display details on cancellation rights, the Trading Standards Institute (TSI) and Association of Chief Trading Standards Officers (ACTSO) has said.”
OUT-LAW.com, 28th October 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
Emrek v Sabranovic: (Case C-218/12); [2013] WLR (D) 390
“Article 15(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters did not require the existence of a causal link between the means employed to direct the commercial or professional activity to the member state of the consumer’s domicile. However, the existence of such a causal link constituted evidence of the connection between the contract and such activity.”
WLR Daily, 17th October 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“An action for annulment of a ‘regulatory act’ within the meaning of the fourth paragraph of article 263FEU of the FEU Treaty was available to an individual with a direct concern in an act of general application which was not a legislative act.”
WLR Daily, 3rd October 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Euro MPs have voted to ban the sale of packs of 10 cigarettes as part of a general tightening of the law. Why?”
BBC News, 8th October 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Mr. Justice Birss summarized the issues in Fenty and Others v Arcadia Group Brands Ltd (t/a Topshop) and Another [2013] EWHC 2310 (Ch), [2013] WLR(D) 310 admirably in paragraph [1] of his judgment in that case: ‘Topshop is a well known fashion retailer. Rihanna is a famous pop star. In March 2012 Topshop started selling a t-shirt with an image of Rihanna on it. The image was a photograph taken by an independent photographer. Topshop had a licence from the photographer but no licence from Rihanna. Rihanna contends that the sale of this t-shirt without her permission infringes her rights. Topshop does not agree. This action is the result.’ ”
NIPC Law, 10th September 2013
Source: www.nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk
“Britain’s six biggest carpet, bed and furniture chains are being investigated by the Office of Fair Trading for exaggerating price cuts.”
Daily Telegraph, 23rd August 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“A businessman who sold fake bomb detectors around the world has been jailed for seven years.”
BBC News, 20th August 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“A billionaire Saudi prince has lost a High Court fight with a Jordanian businesswoman.”
The Independent, 31st July 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“New rules to govern the abuse of sales of ‘packaged accounts’ from banks have come into force.”
BBC News, 31st March 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“If you pay Amazon and it passes the money on to the retailer, a loophole could leave you without redress.”
The Guardian, 19th January 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Dalmare SpA v Union Maritime Ltd and another [2012] EWHC 3537 (Comm); [2012] WLR (D) 391
“Section 14(2) of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 implied a term into a memorandum of agreement for the sale of a vessel sold ‘as she was’ that the goods would be of satisfactory quality.”
WLR Daily, 13th December 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Consumers who buy goods direct from traders abroad can sue the traders in their home country’s courts if certain conditions are met, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled.”
OUT-LAW.com, 10th September 2012
Source: www.out-law.com
“Duncan Campbell reports from the east London court for the first conviction of a racially aggravated offence at the Games.”
The Guardian, 1st August 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“An online toupee-seller broke advertising rules by not providing customers with the address of its foreign supplier and not explaining that customers returning goods would have to pay customs duty, the UK’s advertising watchdog has ruled.”
OUT-LAW.com, 18th July 2012
Source: www.outlaw.com
“Article 28EC of the EC Treaty on the free movement of goods, applied to standardisation and certification activities of a private law body, where the products certified by that body were considered by national legislation to be compliant with national law and where that restricted the marketing of products which were not certified by that body.”
WLR Daily, 12th July 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“You’ve bought a packet of crisps or a box of cereal or a shirt, and the retailer says that if you find a mouse in it, or it dissolves in the wash, then you can return it and that your ‘statutory rights will not be affected’.”
BBC News, 17th June 2012
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Senior representatives from business, consumer, digital and legal organisations met Lord McNally, to share their views on the proposed Common European Sales Law.”
Ministry of Justice, 9th May 2012
Source: www.justice.gov.uk
“A vintage car can still be considered authentic even following a substantial rebuild where many of its original parts are replaced, an appeal court heard yesterday.”
Daily Telegraph, 9th March 2012
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“In the context of a selective distribution system, a contractual clause requiring sales of cosmetics and personal care products to be made in a physical space where a qualified pharmacist had to be present, resulting in a ban on the use of the internet for those sales, amounted to a restriction by object within the meaning of article 101(1)FEU of the FEU Treaty where it was apparent that that clause was not objectively justified. The block exemption provided for in article 2 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2790/1999 of 22 December 1999 on the application of article 81(3) of the Treaty to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices (OJ 1999 L336, p 21) did not apply to a selective distribution contract which contained a clause prohibiting de facto the internet as a method of marketing.”
WLR Daily, 13th December 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Goods coming from a non-EU state which were imitations of goods protected in the European Union by a trade mark or copies of goods protected in the EU by copyright could not be classified as “counterfeit goods” within the meaning of Council Regulation 3295/94/EC (as amended) merely on the basis that they had been brought into the customs territory of the EU under suspensive procedure. However, if it was proved that those goods were intended to be put on sale in the EU, they were classified as ‘counterfeit’.”
WLR Daily, 1st December 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024