When consumers buy a product that turns out to be defective, not only can they ask for a remedy or compensation for the faulty item, they are also entitled to compensation for any damages caused by the defective product. For instance, if an electric appliance catches fire and damages the house of the consumer, the latter may request a remedy both for the defective appliance and compensation for other damages caused to the house. If during the incident consumers hurt, they may also make a claim for the injuries suffered.
What is a ‘defective’ product?
A product is considered defective if it fails to operate with the safety that consumers are entitled to expect, or it does not provide the safety usually provided by models of the same type. However, a product will not generally be considered defective just because a safer version is later put on the market.
SKNVibes | Officials from the Department of Consumer Affairs are special guests on Working for You on Wednesday, April 14
sknvibes.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from sknvibes.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Trader ordered to take back and refund extra tiles sold
timesofmalta.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from timesofmalta.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
The supremacy of our Constitution is the keystone upon which the entire Constitutional structure rests. Our courts are empowered to strike down laws which are found to be inconsistent with the Constitution and in particular those laws which breach the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual set forth in our Constitution.
The European Court of Human Rights and the Constitutional Court of Malta have in a number of cases ruled that the infliction of an administrative penalty in a case where it retained its criminal character could only be imposed by an independent and impartial court. Our courts have also made it amply clear that at all stages of proceedings considered to be criminal, applicants had a right of access to a court, namely one presided over by a magistrate or a judge.
The real issue is fair competition… not ‘unfair propaganda’
This is not a matter of constitutional rights. it is the Competition And Consumer Affairs Authority where the case on political party ownership of television stations should be fought
Raphael Vassallo
21 January 2021, 7:04am
Right: I thought I’d point that out from the start, because – with very few exceptions – most of the people commenting about Lovin Malta’s court case against Net and One TV seem to have missed the point of the entire exercise.
And that, it seems, also goes for Lovin’ Malta’s rationale in opening this case to begin with. On its online news portal, for instance, LM listed no fewer than 15 arguments against a law which permits both Nationalist and Labour parties to own their own TV and radio stations.