About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

44 J. Consumer Pol'y 1 (2021)

handle is hein.journals/jrncpy44 and id is 1 raw text is: Journal of Consumer Policy (2021) 44:1-19 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-020-09467-9 ORIGINAL PAPER - Should Australia Introduce a Prohibition on Unfair Checkfor Trading? Responding to Exploitative Business Systems U;dater in Person and Online J. M. Paterson' E. Bant2 Received: 10 March 2020 /Accepted: 16 July 2020! Published online: 22 August 2020 C Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020 Abstract Australian consumer protection law contains broad and flexible prohibitions on misleading and unconscionable conduct in trade or commerce. Yet concerns have been raised that these prohibitions are unsuitable for responding to predatory business systems. These are busi- nesses that, by design or operation, target consumers experiencing vulnerability to offer costly products ill-suited to their needs. This concern has arisen in response to prominent instances of products of dubious efficacy offered to marginalized communities. It has also arisen from concerns over the increasing potential for data-driven digital marketing to manipulate consumer choice by targeting with fine-grained accuracy consumer vulnerabil- ities. In response to these concerns, it has been suggested that the Australian Consumer Law should be reformed, by introducing a prohibition on unfair trading inspired by the general prohibitions on such conduct in the EU and USA. This paper explores the key considerations relevant in assessing the merits of this proposed statutory transplant. Ultimately, the paper is supportive of the proposed reform, while also recognizing its limits. Keywords Unfair commercial practices - Unfair trading - Unconscionable conduct - Unfair business systems - Disadvantaged communities - Digital manipulation - Regulatory design Australian consumer protection law is replete with principles-based prohibitions on conduct that offends community values and disrupts the fair and efficient operation of the market. In This article is part of an Australian Research Council funded project DP180100932 on coherence in the general prohibition on misleading conduct in the Australian Consumer Law. Research assistance provided by Yi Tung and Calvin Collins, JD Candidates, Melbourne Law School. Errors are our own. W J. M. Paterson jeanniep @unimelb.edu.au E. Bant elise.bant@uwa.edu.au Melbourne Law School, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia 2 Law School, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia e Springer

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most