Tesco v Nattrass

2227 Words9 Pages
CASE ANALYSIS TESCO SUPERMARKETS LTD V. NATTRASS [1972] A.C. 153 Tesco Supermarkets Ltd v. Nattrass [1972] A.C. 153 was an appeal case determined in the House of Lords in 1972 which discusses extensively matters pertaining to Corporate Liability and Consumer Protection, and has been a supporting case law example for decisions which stem from the statutory provisions outlined within the Trade Descriptions Act 1968. In brief, Tesco Supermarkets’ advertised that Radiant washing powder was on sale at a discounted price. All the packs at this displayed price had been sold, and a shop assistant had repacked the shelves with washing powder at the regular inflated price, however the advertising still remained in the store reflecting the discounted price. Mr Clement was the store manager at the time and had marked and signed off his daily ‘checklist’ sheet that the shelves had been re-stocked with the sale priced goods, however only to discover later that the shelves were re-stocked with the washing powder that was individually marked at the inflated price and that an employee had sold a customer a packet of washing powder at the inflated price. Mr. Coane was this customer who undertook legal proceedings to prosecute Tesco Supermarkets Ltd. This matter was initially heard before the Magistrates Court, where the appellant, Tesco Supermarkets (Tesco), was found guilty under section 11(2) of the Trade Descriptions Act 1968 for making false and misleading statements in regards to the price of the washing powder. Tesco sought to rely on the defence clause of Section 24(1) of the Trade Descriptions Act 1968. Although the Court held that Tesco satisfied Section 24(1)(b) of the Trade Descriptions Act 1968 as they had an acceptable workplace procedure implemented to prevent the offence from occurring (the checklist), Mr. Clement was found to be the ‘same person’ as the

More about Tesco v Nattrass

Open Document