Harder, Sirko (2011) Problems in interpreting the unfair contract terms provisions of the Australian Consumer Law. Australian Bar Review, 34. pp. 306-324. ISSN 0814-8589
![]() |
PDF
- Published Version
Restricted to SRO admin only Download (126kB) |
Abstract
There are a number of ambiguities in the unfair contract terms provisions in Pt 2-3 of the Australian Consumer Law. The key concepts ‘consumer contract’, ‘standard form contract’ and ‘upfront price’ are not defined in an
unequivocal manner. Part 2-3 obliges the court to consider a term’s transparency when determining its fairness, but fails to specify the precise requirement(s) of unfairness for which transparency is to be relevant. Part 2-3 fails to expressly address whether a term otherwise unfair may be rendered fair by a price reduction, whether an unfair term can be enforced to
the extent to which it is fair, and whether the contra proferentem rule applies in the context of Pt 2-3. This article tackles the uncertainties mentioned and examines how the relevant provisions could be interpreted,
considering their language, purpose and context. It also makes suggestions for clarifying amendments.
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Schools and Departments: | School of Law, Politics and Sociology > Law |
Subjects: | K Law > K Law in General. Comparative and uniform Law. Jurisprudence > K0520 Comparative law. International uniform law > K0600 Private law |
Related URLs: | |
Depositing User: | Sirko Harder |
Date Deposited: | 22 Sep 2014 08:51 |
Last Modified: | 07 Mar 2017 09:01 |
URI: | http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/50116 |
View download statistics for this item
📧 Request an update