Corporate Law : This article explains how consumer law regulates brand endorsements. The key takeaway is that endorsers face penalties only when m...
Corporate Law : Authorities have clarified that compulsory service charges violate consumer law, reaffirming that tips must be voluntary and canno...
Corporate Law : Overview of the Consumer Protection Act 2019, its key definitions, the establishment of CCPA, product liability, and penalties for...
Corporate Law : भारत में बढ़ते हुए बाजार के प्रभाव को देखते हुए भा...
Corporate Law : Explore the Supreme Court's landmark ruling on corporate claims under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, redefining 'person' and e...
Corporate Law : CCPA imposed ₹1 lakh penalties on two food companies for using misleading 100% claims that did not match the actual composition ...
Corporate Law : The government has exempted smaller edible oil packs and minor edible oils from standardisation requirements. The exemption is aim...
Corporate Law : CCPA fined digital platforms for using interface designs that influenced consumer choices without clear and informed consent. The ...
Corporate Law : The CCPA imposed penalties on coaching institutes after finding that advertisements highlighted successful candidates while hiding...
Corporate Law : The regulator held that selective disclosure of course details and inflated success claims misled aspirants. The ruling reinforces...
Corporate Law : The CCPA ruled that incomplete product details, unverifiable regulatory credentials, and missing mandatory disclosures violated th...
Corporate Law : The CCPA held that automatically adding a service charge to restaurant bills violated the Consumer Protection Act and the CCPA Gui...
Corporate Law : CCPA held that advertising bread as 100% Whole Wheat despite containing only 87% wheat flour was misleading. The authority ordered...
Corporate Law : The Authority ruled that selectively withholding course information and presenting disclaimers in illegible font misled prospectiv...
Corporate Law : The CCPA held that failure to prominently disclose licensing requirements, frequency details, and regulatory approvals for walkie-...
Corporate Law : Standard pack sizes have been recommended for commonly used edible oils to reduce market inconsistencies and assist consumers in c...
Corporate Law : The Government has advised States and UTs not to impose fresh registration requirements on existing repairers merely because of re...
Corporate Law : The Department of Consumer Affairs has clarified that customary units like inches, feet, and dozen may be used as supplementary de...
Corporate Law : The 2026 amendment introduces detailed metrological, technical, and safety standards for non-automated blood pressure devices. The...
Corporate Law : The Ministry of Consumer Affairs is seeking comments on draft rules to amend the Legal Metrology (General) Rules for non-invasive ...
Explore impact of Jan Vishwas Act 2023 on Legal Metrology Act, 2009. Discover revised penalties and its role in promoting ease of doing business.
In present facts of the case, the Revision Petition was filed under section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 which assails order dated 06.02.2015 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.
In present facts of the case, the revision petition was filed under section 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 assailing the order dated 11.08.2017 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Pandri, Raipur.
In present facts of the case, the Revision Petition (RP) has been filed by the Petitioner against Respondents under section 21 (b) of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the order dated 14.12.2017 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Uttar Pradesh (hereinafter referred to as the ‘State Commission’).
In present facts of the case, the NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION NEW DELHI (NCDRC) have refused to condone the delay for 125 days as no ‘sufficient cause’ was shown because there was difference in oral submissions and the contents of the Application submitted.
In present facts of the case, the NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION (NCDRC) have allowed the Revision Petition in favour of the Complainant as medical negligence of the doctor was established as the Complainant was able to discharge its initial burden of proof.
Dive into 2023 draft guidelines by Government of India for prevention and regulation of dark patterns in advertising and e-commerce. Know your rights and what it means for businesses.
In present facts of the case, the matter was remanded and it was observed that the order of this Court dismissing the appeal cannot be read as a precedent and applied to the cases in hand. In fact, precedents cannot decide questions of fact.
Stay informed about the latest government advisory banning advertisements for online betting platforms. Learn about the legal implications and consequences for media entities.
Ministry of Consumer Affairs amends Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Rules, 2020, introducing a revised fee structure based on value of goods or services paid.
