From the analysis of legal sources and viewpoints from relevant stakeholders such as the ACCC and consumers, two alternative solutions have been proposed to offer a choice in defining the boundaries of the law and seeking efficient justice. The first major legal alternative, according to the ACCC's perspective, suggests changing legislation to provide additional government funding opportunities, which would allow for more authority to combat anti-competitive behavior. On the other hand, the consumer's perspective suggests implementing a "victim insurance scheme," wherein financial compensation and support services are provided by the government or overseas administration in cases where consumers are victimized.
In order to ensure equitable outcomes for both the ACCC and consumers, changing legislation to provide more government funding would effectively protect consumers from scams, while the "victim insurance scheme" primarily benefits consumers.
can you fix grammar
From the analysis of the legal sources and the viewpoints from relevant stakeholders: ACCC and consumers, and two related alternative was made to offer choice of defining boundaries of law and seek for efficient justice. A major legal alternative, rom perspective of ACCC is that change legislation to provide further government funding chance that will allow more authority leading to anti-competitive behaviour. From the perspective of the consumer is “victim insurance scheme” that when the consumer is victimised government or overseas administration provide finical compensation and support services.
To ensure both equitable outcomes has achieved for both ACCC and consumer, changing the legislation to provide more government funding as being able to protect consumers from scams whereas “victim insurance scheme” primary benefits consumers.
1 answer
1 answer