The Legal Rights Of Mr. Bob Wheelie

When companies target consumers who are uninformed, they feed lies to the consumer, tricking them into buying something that they didn't want or even need. An example is when fast-food restaurants advertise a humongous burger. A consumer is intrigued with the size of this burger.But when they eventually purchase this burger, they are unsatisfied with the comparison of the advertisement and the actual product.

Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17500 states, “it is unlawful for any … corporation … to … disseminate … any statement … which is untrue or misleading.” “Untrue” is defined as “factual misrepresentations” (compared to “puffery”). Williams v. Gerber Prods. Co., 523 F.3d 934, 939 (9th Cir. 2008).

Another legal definition can be found under the Lanham Act where it is defined as, “Under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, a claim can be made against a defendant for false or misleading advertising. For a claim against a defendant for false advertising, the following elements are met and the plaintiff must show: (1) defendant made false or misleading statements as to his own products (or another’s); (2) actual deception, or at least a tendency to deceive a substantial portion of the intended audience; (3) deception is material in that it is likely to influence purchasing decisions; (4) the advertised goods travel in interstate commerce; and (5) a likelihood of injury to plaintiff. However, the plaintiff does not have to prove actual injury.” The Lanham Act has a more specific and

The Plaintiff is claiming $35 million from the State of NSW, which is purported to be vicariously liable for the Land and Environment Court and Pain J [1]. This claim includes nullifying Pain J’s judgment [14], and it is accompanied by Motions to uphold Lloyd J’s dismissal and refund the Plaintiff’s filing fees [2].

            A misrepresentation is a statement made that is not unified with the truth. There are two categories that misrepresentation can fall under: either innocent or fraudulent. When a misrepresentation is innocent it was made not intentionally to deceive the other party. A fraudulent misrepresentation is made with the intent to deceive with knowledge that it is false. Tommy wants to pursue legal action against Royal 16 Theater on the basis that they conducted fraudulent misrepresentation.

In the United States, The FTC (federal Trade Commission) has the authority to impose penalty against advertisers whom violate Federal Standards for truthful advertising. The FTC considers a message to be deceptive, if they include statements that are likely to mislead reasonable customers and the statements that are likely to mislead reasonable customers and the statements are an important part of purchasing decision. A failure to include important information are also considered deceptive. Also, the FTC also looks at so-called “implied claims,?” Claims that you don’t explicitly make but that can be inferred from what you do or don’t say.

2. Mohamed Haneef Case. 2014. Mohamed Haneef Case. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.lawcouncil.asn.au/lawcouncil/ [Accessed 21 August 2014].

Given the discordant state of the Australian authorities, the High Court took the opportunity in Farah Constructions Pty Ltd v Say-Dee Pty Ltd, (‘Farah Constructions’) to clarify the Australian position on knowing assistance. Their Honours declared, in obiter, that Australian courts should continue to follow the decision in Consul Development v DPC, thereby continuing to see as necessary the requirement of a dishonest design on the part of the fiduciary, and subscribing to the proposition that where the third party’s knowledge falls within the first four categories of the Baden scale it will answer the requirement of knowledge under the second limb of Barnes v Addy.

You have asked me to summarize the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Doré v Barreau du Québec, 2012 SCC 12, SCR 395 and analyze whether the Law society is likely to sanction Evan Frank. Although the Rules of Professional Conduct place limitations on certain conduct to ensure professionalism, the expressive rights of lawyers must be given due respect and the likelihood of Mr. Frank’s sanction will depend on a fair balance of “expressive value” of the content in the letter, with the public’s expectation of professionalism.

2. Made with knowladge of its misrepresentation or without adequate information on the subject to warrant a representation,

By recreating some of Australia’s most famous criminal cases, the director masterfully highlights that truth and lie are often determined by how evidence is constructed through the “mouths and minds of counsel”. Perhaps most crucially, The Diaries reveals how skilled litigators can exploit the credibility gap between “proven liars” and “credible witnesses” when constructing evidence. Yet the director acknowledges that the law recognises this potential for abuse, and mitigates it by confining the rules of evidence through the uniform Evidence Act (‘UEA’). Ultimately, The Diaries proves that the UEA alleviates Sheller JA’s concerns by limiting the ability of legal representatives to unfairly exploit the credibility of witnesses, and thus allows evidence to be assessed on its merits in pursuit of the

In American consumer society, it is common knowledge that businessmen are rarely 100% truthful. Exaggerated advertisements, cheapened materials, and other similar practices have become part of business. The topic of debate, however, is whether this dishonesty in business is ethical. According to Albert Carr in the article “Is Business Bluffing Ethical?”, bluffing is morally acceptable within the parameters of doing business.

I informed him that this would make the pulp of the prunes worthless and that he would need to pick, wash, and separate the pits and the pulp. He agreed that this was the best solution, which is why he is doing all the initial work to obtain the prunes and we are purchasing just the pits from him after. In a way, I was using misrepresentation that is illustrated in article 2.11, Negotiation Ethics. I was using partially true statement when I was informing him of the machines but it was in fact a misrepresentation of the true facts.

The second issue with the material provided is whether the defendant breached that duty4, Blyth Vs Birmingham Waterworks Co .This refers to “Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs would do, or something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do”.5 Evatt breached his duty as an estate agent. The fundamental mark of what constitutes professional information or advice is the expectation engendered in the client that the advice is reliable and that it reaches the required standard of skill, knowledge and expertise. Apply to the case The Common Law says that any professionals – such as bankers, financial advisers, accountants, auditors, doctors and medical specialists – give advice to their clients, which may have far-reaching consequences for the clients. Related with that Evatt made a mistake when he was persuading Norris with purchase the motel. In relation to the material provided, the issue is whether Norris can sue Evatt for the statements about the business. “People who unintentionally or carelessly give false advice, information or opinion on business or professionals matter may be liable for negligent misstatement if the receiver reasonably relied on the false material and suffered economic loss”.6 Harriton Vs Stephens

Cases of false affirmation occurred where the buyer was convinced to buy something by the false statements of the seller;