Equal protection for differentiated consumers: The paradox of Heterogeneity in Consumer Law
| Autor | Gustavo Manuel Rodríguez García |
| Cargo | Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú |
| Páginas | 211-234 |
211
Revista Facultad de Jurisprudencia RFJ No.10 Diciembre 2021
Rodríguez, G. Equal protection for differentiated consumers
Equal protection for differentiated con sumers: The
paradox of Heterogeneity in Consumer Law
Tutela igualitaria para consumidores diferenciados:
la paradoja de la heterogeneidad en el
Derecho del Consumidor
Gustavo Manuel Rodríguez García
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
City: Lima
Country: Perú
Original article (analysis)
RFJ, No. 10, 2021, pp. 211-234, ISSN 2588-0837
ABSTRACT: Consumers have different preferences, needs
and limitations. Despite this unquestionable fact, consumer
protection systems tend to bet blindly on egalitarian protection
schemes. Even more seriously, many egalitarian schemes
operate as mandatory schemes. In this work, it is argued
that such schemes severely injure the principle of consumer
sovereignty and harm the consumer since they move away from
the spontaneous market process and replace it with rigid designs.
KEYWORDS: Consumer, market, liberty, competition,
economics.
RESUMEN: Los consumidores tenemos diferentes
preferencias, necesidades y limitaciones. No obstante ese
dato incuestionable, los sistemas de protección al consumidor
suelen apostar ciegamente por esquemas de tutela igualitarios.
De manera incluso más grave, muchos esquemas igualitarios
operan como esquemas mandatorios. En este trabajo, se
plantea que tales esquemas lesionan severamente el principio
de soberanía del consumidor y agravian al consumidor
dado que se alejan del proceso espontáneo de mercado y lo
reemplazan por diseños rígidos.
DOI 10.26807/rfj.v10i10.382
212
Revista Facultad de Jurisprudencia RFJ No.10 Diciembre 2021
Rodríguez, G. Equal protection for differentiated consumers
PALABRAS CLAVE: Consumidor, mercado, libertad,
competencia, economía.
CÓDIGO JEL: D41, F12.
INTRODUCTION
All individuals are different. We each have our own needs,
expectations, desires, frustrations, virtues, budget constraints,
and so many other traits that make us genuinely unique. This
does not mean, of course, that individuals cannot share needs
and preferences, but this is a possibility that will be verified
to a greater or lesser extent empirically and depending on the
extent of the grouping tested. The group of wine lovers may
be composed of a relatively large number of subjects while the
group of Cabernet Sauvignon - Merlot blend lovers is likely
to be more limited. Given the heterogeneity of individuals’
preferences and budgetary constraints, designing a consumer
protection system composed of egalitarian rights established
by mandatory rules is an undertaking doomed to introduce
harm to multiple consumers rendered invisible by the
proposed grouping.
John F. Kennedy’s famous 1962 speech, recognized as a
milestone for the development of the discipline of consumer
protection, begins with the phrase: “consumers, by definition,
include us all” which conveys precisely the idea that the term
“consumer” is comprehensive of all individuals. That this is so,
however, does not mean that all consumers must imperatively
be protected equally. The reinforcement of unitary protection in
consumer law - under an explicitly or implicitly statutory logic -
undermines what should be the foundation on which a sensible
consumer law is built: the principle of consumer sovereignty.
This paper aims to argue that any reflection on consumer law,
Para continuar leyendo
Solicita tu prueba