header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
09 October 2015 / Stephen Gold
Issue: 7671 / Categories: Features , Civil way , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Civil way: 9 October 2015

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Consumer law: back to school; assured shortholds: s 21 notice prescribed; £5K for bankruptcy.

CONSUMERS ALRIGHT ACT: FIRST DOLLOP

“Oh no. The Sale of Goods Act—1677 wasn’t it? That’s about all I know. I learnt it at law school. They can’t take it away from me now.”

Steady on. It was 1893 actually and then there was the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (SGA 1979). What’s happened is that the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA 2015)—its meat came into force on 1 October 2015 by dint of commencement order SI 2015/1630 and catches contracts made on or after that date—replaces for consumer contracts only the SGA 1979 (well, most of it), the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (UCTA 1977), the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (SI 1999/2083) (UCTAR), the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 and the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002 (SI 2002/3045). To be precise, the replacement is for a contract made between a trader (a person acting for purposes relating to their

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll