Difference between revisions of "Consumer Protection from Deceptive and Unconscionable Acts (11:IV)"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 70: | Line 70: | ||
For the consumer to set aside the consumer transaction on the basis that the supplier engaged in a deceptive act or practice, the representation must be '''material''' – what is material depends on the individual circumstances of the transaction (''Rushak''). | For the consumer to set aside the consumer transaction on the basis that the supplier engaged in a deceptive act or practice, the representation must be '''material''' – what is material depends on the individual circumstances of the transaction (''Rushak''). | ||
The court may draw the conclusion that a practice is deceptive on the basis of vague contractual language in circumstances where that language allowed the supplier to claim that additional work was not part of the original contract: see | The court may draw the conclusion that a practice is deceptive on the basis of vague contractual language in circumstances where that language allowed the supplier to claim that additional work was not part of the original contract: see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/1999/1999canlii6663/1999canlii6663.html?autocompleteStr=British%20Columbia%20(Director%20of%20Trade%20Practices)%20v%20Van%20City%20Construction%20Ltd&autocompletePos=2 ''British Columbia (Director of Trade Practices) v Van City Construction Ltd'', [1999<nowiki>]</nowiki> BCJ No 2033 (SC) (QL)]. | ||
=== 2. Unconscionable Acts === | === 2. Unconscionable Acts === | ||