header-logo header-logo

The end of sharp practice?

07 June 2007 / Helen Hart
Issue: 7276 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Helen Hart considers the impact of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive

Traders could find their creativity stifled by the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive 2005/29/EC (the Directive). Is it simply creating more red tape or will it create a level playing field which will prove a benefit for businesses? A recent Times article (27 April 2007) suggested that theatres and promoters would fall foul of the Directive if they used selective quotes from reviews to sell tickets for performances. The view was expressed that if positive-sounding quotes from otherwise negative reviews were used out of context, they would be contrary to the Directive, which outlaws giving information which is likely to mislead the average consumer, even if such information is correct.

Another practice which could fall foul of the Directive is the practice of insurance companies advertising a 14-day money back guarantee if you find a cheaper price for similar insurance elsewhere, when insurance companies must offer a cancellation period. Consequently, selling this as a benefit with the implication that it is an addition

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll