Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Most false advertising litigation involves definitions four and five listed above because they both specifically prohibit false advertising. [22] To prove a violation under the fourth definition of unfair competition, the plaintiff must show that (1) the defendant engaged in unfair, deceptive, untrue or misleading advertising and (2) the ...
So, under the Misrepresentation Act 1967, damages for negligent misrepresentation are calculated as if the defendant had been fraudulent, even if he has been merely careless. [87] Although this was almost certainly not the intention of Parliament, no changes to the law have been made to address this discrepancy: the Consumer Rights Act 2015 ...
The California Consumers Legal Remedies Act ("CLRA") is the name for California Civil Code §§ 1750 et seq. [1] The CLRA declares unlawful several "methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices undertaken by any person in a transaction intended to result or which results in the sale or lease of goods or services to any consumer". [2]
It has in the past included in its mission the goal of preventing "fraud, deception, and unfair business practices in the marketplace". [6] It does so by "collecting reports from consumers and conducting investigations, suing companies and people that break the law, developing rules to maintain a fair marketplace, and educating consumers and ...
The lawsuit includes claims for conspiracy, negligence, fraudulent misrepresentation and unfair business practices. It seeks an unspecified amount of compensatory and punitive damages.
Damage to the party against whom the breach occurs. [12] The first element may, in employment-at-will jurisdictions, be held fulfilled in regards to a previously unterminated employer/employee relationship. In California, these are the elements of negligent interference with prospective economic advantage, which the plaintiff must establish:
Telemarketing Associates, Inc. (2003), the Court upheld an Illinois telemarketing anti-fraud law against claims that it was a form of prior restraint, affirming consumer protection against misrepresentation was a valid government interest justifying a free speech exception for false claims made in that context. [27] The 2012 decision United ...
A 72-year-old California woman has sued Home Depot for age discrimination and wrongful termination after the retail giant fired her for failing to stop $5,000 in fraudulent transactions.