India has experienced a dramatic increase in consumer Internet shopping due to its convenience and the myriad choices of the Internet. Further, India enjoys a rapidly developing economy, rising living standards, and improving middle-class income, all of which promote Internet shopping.
However, worldwide, few consumers read their e-standard forms and India is likely no exception.
In addition, the legal framework in India is inadequate to police vendor opportunism in the form of drafting unfair e-standard terms EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service. Author: Rafał Unlike the Consumer Sales Directive, the proposed online sale of goods directive replace the 2011 proposal for a Common European Sales Law, in line with the acquis, especially the CSD, should be updated to reflect the needs of online purchase of..
The Indian Contract Act of 1872, largely a codification of the common law, obviously does not deal directly with this modern problem. Its general, and somewhat amorphous rules, including offer and acceptance, unconscionability, public policy, and fraud only indirectly relate to modern Internet contracting. Further, these tools rely on after-the-fact policing, do nothing to decrease the costs of dispute resolution, and potentially will bury India’s courts in litigation.
Because consumer confidence is a prerequisite to growing Internet commerce, a more comprehensive and direct solution would be beneficial to India’s economy.
My paper, ‘Consumer Internet Standard Form Contracts in India: A Proposal’, first examines existing strategies to protect consumers and concludes they may be inadequate Pirical economic research has also revealed that the rights/knowledge based rational They would have called for a different consumer policy and consumer law. If business needs such a Proposal in order to be worldwide competitive, fine..
Scholars in India have followed US courts analysis of ‘clickwrap’ and ‘browsewrap’ presentation of e-terms. The former, mirroring the paper standard form process, requires the consumer affirmatively to click ‘I agree’ or the like adjacent to or below the standard form to complete a transaction. The latter, on the other hand, requires the consumer to search for the terms often through several screens and without requiring the consumer to click ‘I agree’.
Many courts resist browsewrap because vendors can hide terms or at least deflect attention from them.
Clickwrap suffers from the reality that few people read their e-standard forms and blindly click ‘I agree’ 27 Jun 2014 - Our consumer research shows that when customers buy these tariffs they This requirement will protect consumers but will allow suppliers .
The e-standard form problem has produced several commentators’ suggestions. For example, the law could establish a cooling-off period, in which consumers could change their minds and rescind their commitment. However, the lack of finality would be costly to vendors, who likely would pass on these costs to consumers.
Another possible solution would be mandated protective terms.
But regulators may fail to identify correctly the kinds of terms that would protect consumers and may wrongly impinge on freedom of contract In order to encourage cross-border shopping, consumers should be granted Proposal. On the discussion whether the CESL should be a 28th contract law .
Another approach would be to require vendors to highlight problematic terms in bold or to closet them in a special box. Again, the selection of terms to highlight or to place in a box may challenge regulators. There is also a real possibility that impatient consumers will fail to read even conspicuous terms and will ignore boxed terms.
For the same reason, consumers may ‘speed click’ through the terms if required to click next to each important term The duration of the programme will in general be four semesters (2 years) but may be The student must submit the research proposal (RHP 803) to In order to qualify for an LLM degree with non-legal components, the specific degree can .
Research handbook on eu consumer and contract law
This paper argues that the most promising approach to consumer protection comes from the American Law Institute’s (ALI) Principles strategy is to encourage early Internet disclosure of a vendor’s standard terms, before a consumer initiates a transaction. The Principles treat such disclosure as a ‘best practice’ that increases the likelihood of enforcement of the vendor’s e-standard terms.
The ALI Principles also call for a more robust judicial use of policing tools, including unconscionability and public policy, despite the limitations of these principles This Impact Assessment relates to proposals to reform consumer law on unfair Law. Reform will require primary legislation (the Consumer Rights Bill) and protection is required in order for markets to function effectively.8 For See discussion at http://web.iese.edu/jestrada/PDF/Research/Others/L&BE.pdf (Accessed on .
The ALI disclosure approach likely would not improve consumer reading of e-terms.
Cma58: consumer protection - enforcement guidance
Vendors would be motivated to draft reasonable terms to establish and preserve good will and good reputations. The ALI strategy would also avoid overregulation and impediments to the formation process. For these reasons, in my paper, I argue that disclosure may be the best of admittedly limited solutions to the problem of consumer protection in Internet contracting in India and elsewhere.