The Price of Trust: Re-evaluating Consumer Protection in the 21st Century

Introduction  

For commerce to thrive and be sustained, there must be a mutual trust between two parties—the  buyer and the seller. This principle has remained fundamental for centuries. From the era of trade  and barter—to this modern era where currency notes and digital transactions are made in exchange  of goods and services.  

This begs a compelling question—how is this mutual trust guaranteed? The ‘mutual trust’ in the  transaction of commerce has mitigated the tragedies of unfair practices because of consumer  protection. Consumer protection in this vein can be a statutory body or a judicial activism—that  aims at protecting consumers against unfair practices from sellers. 

In the 21st century, consumer protection has become increasingly pertinent as it should adapt to  modern changes and address emerging threats—especially in digital trade and global markets.  Given the striking practices such as intentional selling of fake products, online frauds/scams,  privacy leaks/violations and the imposition of ‘no refund after payment’—calls for intermediate  attention to this rising cause. 

In short, this article argues that trust has a price—and that price is paid through effective consumer  protection—which without it, both consumers and markets suffer. It also traverses the overview  of laws, challenges, evaluation, and recommendations of consumer protection in the 21st  century—hereby addressing the digital/global transactions in commerce.

Consumer Protection 

Consumer protection like a tree and a consumer its branches—makes it structureless if this tree is  drawn on a paper with no branches. This metaphor captures the importance of consumer protection  and who it sought to protect in the field of commerce.  

Who is a consumer? 

Under section 2(7)(i) of the CPA (Consumer Protection Act, 2019) of India, “a consumer is one  who buys any goods for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly  promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any user of such goods other  than the person who buys such goods for consideration paid or promised or partly paid or partly  promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such use is made with the approval of  such person, but does not include a person who obtains such goods for resale or for any  commercial purpose.”1 While this statutory provision gives the essential elements of consumption,  it fails to capture the modern evolution of commerce that regards digital transactions, online  subscriptions and indirect consumers. However, this definition, though comprehensive in its 2019  context, demands further refinement in addressing the current e-commerce challenges. 

What is consumer protection? 

Having given a satisfactory definition of who a consumer is, it’s way easier now to point out whom  the law sought to protect. That now leads us to the question—what is consumer protection? As  briefly stated by Osborne’s concise law dictionary,2consumer protection is the legislation which  protects the interest of consumers. Osborne’s definition on consumer protection succeeds in being  brief, legalistic and direct but limits consumer protection to statutory law, while failing to  acknowledge that there are many non-statutory ways by which consumers are protected.  Consumers can be protected by judicial activism, by social awareness and many more. Consumer  protection does not only safeguard the buyer from dangerous or inferior goods and services or  fraudulent and unfair selling practices, but also protects the interests and rights of consumers in  the market world.  

historical evolution—from Caveat Emptor (let the buyer beware) to Caveat Venditor (let the  seller beware). 

How did we get here—from the concept of caveat emptor (let the buyer be aware) to caveat  venditor (let the seller beware)? Well, this could be traced to have started around the 17th century  when buyers had the absolute responsibility to examine goods before purchasing them. It was in  fact recognized by law that buyers are in such obligation—to detect defective goods before  purchase. This puts the buyer in a tough position as the buyer incurs all liability and is blamed for  not being observant. Just like the case of Chandelor v. Lopus (1603)3 which reflected the principle  (caveat emptor). A buyer purchased a “bezoar stone”—known for curing poison. When it turned  out the product was fake, the court ruled no remedy on the ground there was no express warranty.  This principle brought about manifest injustice in the field of commerce. 

With the advent of industrialisation around the 19th century, the paradigm shift from the principle  of caveat emptor (let the buyer be aware) to caveat venditor (let the seller beware) puts the seller  on the obligation of ensuring goods aren’t defected. This is so because it’s difficult for buyers to  easily point out defects in products following the modern changes in commerce. This brought  about new Acts such as the Sale of Goods Act. Under section 14(2), there exists an implied term  that sellers should ensure the goods sold to buyers are of merchantable quality.4 This principle  gained a judicial blessing in a celebrated case of Donoghue v. Stevenson—where the court ruled  that the seller ought to have in mind that his product would be consumed by the buyer and, if  defective, might harm the buyer.5 

In essence, caveat emptor doctrine limited the rights of consumers in the 17th century, but the  emergence of industrialisation prompted courts to adopt the caveat venditor doctrine which now  balances market fairness. 

Consumer rights. 

How could we have known that consumers have basic rights in the field of commerce — if not  with the advent of consumer protection? The formal recognition of consumer rights revolutionised  global commerce, making a paradigm shift from ethical and moral market practices to protection  of consumer rights. Following the declaration made by President John F Kennedy before the US Congress in 19626—incorporating four basic rights which are: right to safety, to choose, to be  informed and to be heard, sets a stepping stone to the protection of consumer rights. While this  declaration established statutory authority, it lacked international enforceability until when  recognised by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) which  revised its guidelines and expanded those rights into eight. They include: rights to the satisfaction  of basic needs, safety, information, choice, representation, redress, consumer education and a  healthy and sustainable environment.7 Even with this internalization, some jurisdictions are faced  with weak enforcement, inadequate awareness and digital exploitation. 

Legal Backups in different jurisdiction  

Many jurisdictions have incorporated the consumer protection rights into their respective  constitutions. Such as the constitution of Kenya, Spain and Portugal. Though some countries like  Nigeria have not made express provisions into their constitution on those rights, some provisions  of her constitution still uphold such rights indirectly. Like chapter 4 of the constitution8 which  professes fundamental rights. This applies to other jurisdictions who haven’t made the bold step of  altering those basic consumer rights into their respective constitutions. Such countries like: India  and South Africa still rely on laws and Acts enacted by different agencies/organisations whose aim  is to protect the rights of consumers. This begs a crucial question: should consumer protection be  seen as constitutional guarantee or merely a policy objective? Indeed, the absence of express  constitutional provision weakens the consumer rights and leaves its protection to depend on  political promises. 

Regulatory Agencies in different jurisdictions: 

As much as some jurisdictions haven’t incorporated the consumer rights into their respective  constitutions, some agencies affirm the effectiveness and protection of consumer rights in their  respective countries. Some of which are: Federal Competition and Consumer Protection (FCCPA)  2018 for Nigeria. This Act protects the rights of consumers and encourages a competitive market practice. As much as it aims at filtering out some unethical practices, it’s faced challenges of weak  enforcement and fails to adhere with modern digital growth. Its liability for offenders is outdated.  The most disturbed part of this act is that it made no provisions for the injured consumer to claim  compensation. The fines paid by violators of this act only goes to the government and the injured  consumer is left with the injury untouched. 

For India is the Central Consumer Protection Authority, (CCPA). This regulatory body has been  empowered by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 to protect and enforce consumer rights in the  country. While this agency sticks to its provisions, it still faces challenges in terms of digital  enforcement of consumer rights. 

The Nation Consumer Commission (NCC) is a body that enforces and protects the rights of  consumers in South Africa. Section 85 of the Consumer Protection Act (CPA) 2008 birthed its  existence. Its aim at creating social awareness to consumers on their rights and encouraging  consumers to seek necessary redress—if their rights are violated reveal its crucial role in the  country. 

Judicial/Administrative Process for Consumer Redress—tribunals, mediation. It’s worth noting that the processes it takes to enforce consumer rights in court of law differ in  different jurisdictions.  

In Nigeria, these processes are mainly provided under Federal Competition and Consumer  Protection (FCCPA) 2018. Under section 39 of the Act, a tribunal is established whose  responsibility is to adjudicate over conducts prohibited by the Act and its jurisdiction is extended  throughout the federation. This process strengthens uniformity and promotes fairness. Though,  consumers are faced with challenges of justice not met by its rigorous process.  

In India, following the provisions stated in the CPA (Consumer Protection Act, 2019), consumers  can seek redress in the following approaches by first reporting to the seller. It promotes mutual  dialogue between the buyer and the seller in the field of commerce. If at any point there’s a disparity  in understanding, the both parties can now seek redress either in court or through mediation. As  provided in sections 74-81.9 

Case law that shaped consumer protection enforcement. 

One interesting case that shaped consumer protection enforcement is the case of Chukwuma v.  Peace mass transit.10 

The fact of this case hinges on the principle of ‘no refund after payment’—where the plaintiff  boarded a transit ticket. Due to unforeseen delay , the plaintiff cancelled the journey. When he  requested for a refund, the defendant declined claiming there’s an exemption clause that bars refund  after payment. The plaintiff sued and the court ruled the exemption clause of “no refund after  payment” is illegal—whereby relying on the provisions of sections 120, 104, 129(1) (a) and (b)  (iii) of Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, 2018. The judgement of this case  reflects on addressing digital commerce. This issue of no ‘refund after payment’ has become  rampant and has turned into a tradition—even when services have not yet been rendered,  consumers are forced to pay and threatened with no refund. This has withdrawn the consumer’s  choice. This judicial activism has strengthened consumer protection. 

The faith of consumer protection in the digital age 

Trade in commerce became easier with the advent of digital inventions ( e-commerce). Payments  are made without the need to go around with currency notes nor to visit banks for transactions.  Contracts are awarded and executed on cross borders without the need to meet physically. Yet,  this swift innovation is faced with challenges — which include: online scams/frauds, data privacy  violations, Fake reviews and false advertising and many more. How then does consumer protection  exercise its objectives with these new threats? 

How far the existing laws cover digital transactions 

Though, laws have been made to ensure consumer rights are protected, yet — no provisions are  made to address this new threat that comes with the advent of the digital age in some jurisdictions.  That dumbs all the efforts made by agencies that promote consumer rights and protections. The  problem only lies in outdated provisions of Acts and failure to amend to fit this modern world. Just  like FCCPA 2018, no provision is made that directly addresses the digital threats (online  frauds/scams and Data privacy violations) consumers face on their daily transactions. Such legal  inadequacy puts consumers in grey areas and undermines their rights.  

Even when some jurisdictions have failed to recognise these new threats, other jurisdictions have  done a wonderful job by updating their laws to meet the high demands of this digital age. Such of  which is the CPA 2019. Under section 2(47), it prohibits deceptive, misleading or unfair conducts  by sellers or service providers — which includes; online misrepresentation, fake advertisement or  fraudulent offers. This new change balances the digital threats with consumer protection and  restores consumer choice in commerce. 

What international laws have to say 

The UN has made incredible efforts in mapping out policies to address this striking threat that  comes with the digital age. These policies fall under guidelines adopted as the General Assembly  Resolution 70/186 of 22 December 2015. These guidelines enhance consumer confidence in e commerce—ensuring consumers shopping online have the same rights as those buying in-stores. 

Re-evaluating Consumer Trust and consumer protection  

Consumer trusts are undeniably the foundation of the enactments of consumer protection laws— both local and international. The relationship between consumer trusts and consumer protection  strengthen public confidence in the market. The efforts made by both local and international  agencies are for consumers to be protected from injurious practices done by the sellers in the field  of commerce.  

As much as consumer protection has laid this trust, it’s still faced with the challenge of weak  enforcement which erodes public confidence in the market—leaving consumer’s trusts abandoned.  While some laws of consumer protection are outdated, sellers do take advantage of its provisions  in terms of fines for liability—as its fines are cheaper than the current market trends. Good  examples are Nigeria consumer protection laws (Standard Organisation of Nigeria Act 2015, Food  and Drugs Act 1974, National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control Act 1993,  Counterfeit and Fake Drugs and Unwholesome Processed Foods Act 1999, etc). These laws failed  to acknowledge consumer compensations and its fines for punishment of offenders are low to  balance the status quo trends in commerce. As much as trust is a social and legal currency, the  market system suffers when lost.  

What is the way forward? 

As there’s remedy to every problem—so as the challenges faced with consumer protection laws  have its remedies. In order to have a sustainable and effective consumer protection laws that  addresses these striking threats—the following should be considered. 

1. First is the need to strengthen digital protection laws and enforcement agencies. Over the  years, there have been an increasing cases of online scams, data breaches and misleading  digital advertisements. Governments are hereby called to update the existing laws to cover  these emerging technologies such as: artificial intelligence (AI), E-commerce, etc. And  empower consumer protection agencies to ensure swift compliance and swift sanctions for  violations. 
2. On a second note is creating social awareness such as: consumer education and awareness  campaigns. It’s a known fact that ignorance is a disease and whatever you don’t know will  hurt you. By creating consumer protection awareness in social gatherings or through social  media, it can help ameliorate these striking threats—as it enables consumer to know their  rights and seek redress whenever they’re in violation. 
3. Most importantly, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) should be encouraged. Consumers  most times are discouraged by the heavy cost of litigation and it’s time-consuming nature,  other than enforcing their rights. ADR is the way forward as it enables quicker, cost  effective and less formal resolution for consumer disputes. 
4. In addition, technology and data monitoring tools should be integrated into law  enforcement agencies. This enhances accurate data monitoring which can help detect those  ill-practices like online frauds and also help manage consumer complaints. 
5. Lastly, international corporation is crucial in obtaining consumer protections on cross border. Mutual corporation among countries over databases, exchange of information and  harmonized legal backups can aid to fight against transnational consumer frauds. 

Conclusion  

The dreams of having a transparent, sustainable and reliable transaction in the market start with an  actual protection of consumer trusts. By achieving this, consumers’ trust hath to be guaranteed— through enforcement of consumer protection laws and its agencies and creation of consumer  awareness throughout the globe. This is vital for market stability.

It is, in no two ways certain that consumer protection is the bedrock for a modern economy. The  concept of protecting consumer trust creates a tone of certainty and relief to the consumer that his  rights are been protected—and not relying merely on seller’s reputation as seen in 17th century  practices. 

It is also worthy to note that consumer protection soughts not to protect consumers only—but to  create a conducive and reliable atmosphere in the market where everyone (buyer and seller) can  relate economically. Hence, in protecting the consumer, the law protects the integrity of the market  itself. 

Reference / Bibliography 

Table of Legislation 

1. Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended). 
2. Consumer Protection Act 2019 (India). 
3. Counterfeit and Fake Drugs and Unwholesome Processed Foods Act 1999 (Nigeria). 4. Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018 (Nigeria). 
4. Food and Drugs Act 1974 (Nigeria). 
5. National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control Act 1993 (Nigeria). 7. Sale of Goods Act 1893 (UK). 
6. Standard Organisation of Nigeria Act 2015 (Nigeria). 

International legislation  

1. United Nations Guidelines for Consumer Protection (adopted by UNCTAD 1985, revised  1999). 

Table of Cases 

1. Chandelor v Lopus (1603) Cro Jac 4, 79 ER 3. 
2. Chukwuma v Peace Mass Transit (Unreported, 2021).
3. Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562 (HL). 

Book 

1. Felicia Monye, Law of Consumer Protection (2nd edn, Kraft Books Limited 2021). 

Dictionary  

1. Osborne’s Concise Law Dictionary (12th edn, Sweet & Maxwell 2013). 

Articles 

1. Ahmed Tijjani Abdulkadir, ‘No Refund After Payment: Peace Mass Transit Loses In  Court’ (Tidbits Blog, 10 April 2023) <https://www.ahmadabdulkadir.com.ng/2023/04/no refund-after-payment-peace-mass.html?m=1> accessed 7 November 2025. 
2. John F Kennedy, ‘Special Message to Congress on Protecting Consumer Interest’ (15  March 1962) <https://www.jfklibrary.org/asset-viewer/archives/jfkpof-037-028> accessed  7 November 2025.

1 Consumer Protection Act 2019, s2(7)(i) 

2 Roger Bird (edn), Osborne’s Concise Law Dictionary (12th edn, Sweet & Maxwell 2013)

3 Chandelor v. Lopus (1603) Cro Jac 4, 79 ER3, cited in Harry Cayton, ‘Caveat emptor: Let the regulatory  ‘buyer’ beware’ (2023) Ascend Magazine <https://ascend.thentia.com/voices/caveat-emptor-cayton/>  accessed 7 November 2025. 

4 Sale of Goods Act 1893, s14(2), cited in Irish Statute Book  <https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1893/act/71/section/14/enacted/en/html> accessed 7 November 2025.

5 Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932) AC 562, cited in Felicia Monye, ‘Law of Consumer Protection’ (2nd end,  Kraft Books Limited 2021) 17

6 John F Kennedy, ‘Special Message to Congress on Protecting Consumer Interest’ (15 March 1962)  <https://www.jfklibrary.org/asset-viewer/archives/jfkpof-037-028> accessed 7 November 2025. 

7 The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) expanded the consumer rights to  eight in the United Nations Guidelines for Consumer Protection (1985, revised 1999), as cited in Felicia  Monye, ‘Law of Consumer Protection’ (2nd edn, Kraft Books Limited 2021) 27. 

8 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), ch IV.

9 Consumer Protection Act 2019 (India) s74-81, cited in ‘Vidhi Judicial Academy’  <https://vidhijudicial.com/sec-74-to-81-chapter-v-(mediation)-the-consumer-protection-act,-2019.html>  accessed 7 November 2025.

10 Ahmed Tijjani Abdulkadir, ‘No Refund After Payment: Peace Mass Transit Loses In Court’ (Tidbits Blog,  10 April 2023) <https://www.ahmadabdulkadir.com.ng/2023/04/no-refund-after-payment-peace mass.html?m=1> accessed 7 November 2025.