• We have a few events lined up for the October school holidays!
    Watch this space...

To Settle Q8 Once And For All!! (1 Viewer)

El_chupah_nebre

New Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2003
Messages
21
Location
newcastle
The people that maintain the answer is Tort Law please understand the following.
- Do not compare the case to the Donoghue V stevenson Case with this scenario because it provides no relevance whatsoever! Chris cannot claim negligence under tort law for the following reason:-
1. There was no harm caused thus negligance is irrelevant.
What is more specific to the question is Contract law as the TPA states a consumer can claim redress under the fact that "goods must be of merchanable quality" in which box of cereal wasn't.

I can really see both arguments but the Contract law is more specific to the question....

I swear to god the person who wrote this multiple choice question was inspired by the simpsons episode in which Bart Simpson opens a packet of "CrustyO's" to the horror of swallowing a razor that was in the cereal. hmmm... interesting!!
 

adamj

Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2003
Messages
488
El, how does a person who hasn't studied Consumers meant to know that?
 

J-J

New Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2003
Messages
1
Location
North Shore
Yeah, I don't know about what the answer is for sure and reading all this is just making me get more nervous about something that I don't have to anymore. Can somebody guarentee a correct answer? No. So when does the BOS release their results.. cause now I'm stinging for the solutions haha ... For the record I chose torts; and I didn't do consumers.
 

shazabdazla

Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2003
Messages
186
Location
www.fattyfatty.com
i agree with adam j....

i have not studied consumer law as an elective and thus would not have been able to dicriminate between cases to come to such a conclusion on contract law....

the multiple choice is done by all students and is based on law and society...
therefore to propose a question which requires knowledge of consumer law (an elective) to come to an appropriate and correct solution would be injust.

in eXel law and society it states:

"Torts: A tort is a wrongful act committed by somebody against someone else. Such acts include ... NEGLIGENCE ...eg. case of D v S"

and,

" Contract law: ...deals with agreements between people...buying and selling a house...doing something for someone for a sum of money"

- which seems to hint a formal agreement such as buying house or performing...

also:

under consumer law:
the buyer of the cereal (assumed) would have bought the cereal from the retailer, not the manufacturer, thus no legal contract existed, similarly to D v S...

any points missed and what do you think??
 

pinksugar

New Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2003
Messages
13
haha thats so funny! your whole year was based around your area's crime? must have really made it easier to understand the topics! :D
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top