The Consumer Protection Act 1987 was passed to give effect to the Directive. Compare the rights and remedies given by the Act with those available in Contract and Tort. Consider in the light of this comparison whether the Act has succeeded in its main aims.
Defective products, which cause damage, can give rise to liability and this traditionally arose under the common law. However, the common law approach places the burden on the claimant to establish that the defendant owes a duty to him, was in breach of that duty and that they suffered damages as a result of that breach, and it may not always be straightforward to establish causation, …show more content…
LIMITATION OF ACTION
Claims in tort must be commenced within 6 years from when the damage occurs. However, any claim in Negligence for personal injury must be bought before the court within 3 years of the date of inquiry and claims for defamation must be bought within a year of the defamatory statement.
The right to bring a claim under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 expires after 10 years from the date the defendant supplied the product in the course of a business. The claimant should commence proceedings within three years of becoming aware of the defective product, the damage or the identity of the defendant, or if the damage is concealed, the date of knowledge of the claimant, provided it is within the 10 year limit. In the case of personal injuries, it is up to the court’s discretion to override the three-year limitation period. While there is flexibility with the three-year limitation period for personal injury, there is no leeway on the 10-year period of when the defendant supplied the defective product, whatever the reason. The rights granted to consumers under CPA 1987 are clearly superior to the rights granted under the law of Tort, as consumer injured by defective products are