Topic > Consumer Protection Case Study - 657

All businesses are required by law to comply with legal responsibilities. A company should know the external influences that govern the industry in order to function well. No company can be profitable without its customers - they are as important as the employees, if not more. It is the customers who bring success to these companies and at the same time give determination. Not all customers are contributors, some are rude, possessive and some are just trying to get through business. “Companies have a role to play in improving the lives of all their customers, employees and shareholders by sharing with them the wealth they have created” ( Bateman & Stair, 2006, p. 175). Consumer protection laws are established to regulate private law relationships between individual consumers and businesses that retail goods and services. Their aim is to safeguard consumer rights and meaningful commercial competition. The government normally requires companies to disclose in-depth information about their products, particularly regarding public health and well-being. There was a case involving Johnson & Johnson's all-metal hip implant. This case involved a 65-year-old former prison guard who claimed to have contracted metal poisoning from the devices. Industrial implants from Johnson & Johnson's DePuy orthopedic division were recalled in 2010 due to design defects. These implants were said to release toxic metal debris into patients' bodies. The devices feature a ball and cup covered in cobalt and chrome, but have been advertised as more durable than plastic and ceramic. The plaintiffs alleged that the two rubbed against each other producing this toxic debris. It was said that about 5 in 10 needed to be replaced... half the paper... if there was a chance that the damage would outweigh the cost of taking the safety measures, then the company would have to take them, whereas if the cost was attributable. It was a legal but unethical decision because people's lives were at stake. There are many reasons why strictly cost-effective theories should not be used. People's lives should not be put in danger just because the price is too high and the risk could be reduced. The stakes for Ford are very high. Their reputations are on the line due to the backlash and lawsuits they face. It is well established through obtainable case law. It inspires companies to take precautionary measures against risks that incur huge expenses. One might reason that things should have had some mutual relationship. And last but not least, it offers something for businesses to follow.