Amazon being fair?

steampowered

unholyangel wrote: »

I wouldn't say its ever been mentioned on here enough to be regarded as a myth being circulated, let alone a common one.

If anything, the common myth being circulated regarding amazon seems to be that they're a UK company and therefore need to abide by UK law.

People often say that Amazon can't be sued in the UK or that UK law doesn't apply on MSE in threads concerning Amazon. As did the person I was responding to in the quote bubble. It is well meaning advice but it is wrong. That is why I said it was a common myth.

While it is true that Amazon trades a Luxembourg company, they do that for tax reasons. Where the company is incorporated has nothing to do with whether or not UK law applies to the consumer's contract with Amazon, and nothing to do with whether Amazon can be sued in the UK.

If you buy something from Amazon, all the usual UK law protections such as the Consumer Rights Act still apply.

If you buy something from Amazon, you are still perfectly entitled to sue them in the UK. This is what EU law provides (Rome I Regulation) and it is also what Amazon's T&Cs provide.

unholyangel

steampowered wrote: »

People often say that Amazon can't be sued in the UK or that UK law doesn't apply on MSE in threads concerning Amazon. As did the person I was responding to in the quote bubble. It is well meaning advice but it is wrong. That is why I said it was a common myth.

While it is true that Amazon trades a Luxembourg company, they do that for tax reasons. Where the company is incorporated has nothing to do with whether or not UK law applies to the consumer's contract with Amazon, and nothing to do with whether Amazon can be sued in the UK.

If you buy something from Amazon, all the usual UK law protections such as the Consumer Rights Act still apply.

If you buy something from Amazon, you are still perfectly entitled to sue them in the UK. This is what EU law provides (Rome I Regulation) and it is also what Amazon's T&Cs provide.

Okay, the rome I convention is nowhere near as straightforward as what you're implying. rome I relates to the choice of law for contractual obligations (what law applies to the contract). Brussels convention is the relevant one for jurisdiction if memory serves (which country's courts you can make a claim in).

But I digress. Its perfectly possible for amazon to stipulate that the contract is governed in accordance with the laws of the duchy of luxembourg. However they need to also ensure they make clear that the consumer still benefits from domestic mandatory provisions (and only mandatory provisions - not all domestic law) else the choice of law term is at high risk of being found unfair under other legislation and thus unenforceable.

Article 9 of the rome convention states:

1. Overriding mandatory provisions are provisions the respect for which is regarded as crucial by a country for safeguarding its public interests, such as its political, social or economic organisation, to such an extent that they are applicable to any situation falling within their scope, irrespective of the law otherwise applicable to the contract under this Regulation

Or as explained by this solicitors:

This Article allows English courts (or the courts of another EU Member State) to apply a foreign law to a contract, irrespective of its governing law. However, it only applies to ‘overriding mandatory provisions’. This is generally a small, easily identifiable class of laws and so the extra local law risk imposed by this Article is often seen as limited.