terms under consumer contracts, which is identified as best practice, is to be deemed to be the law of country A, even though the unfair terms law was not enacted in country A. This would effectively introduce a highest common denominator approach to harmonisation.
In addition, consideration could be given to enacting provisions extending the jurisdiction of a member’s consumer protection laws. Although this would allow for a greater range of circumstances in which a particular member’s law would apply to a cross-border consumer transaction, this would not necessarily enhance harmonisation.
Recognition of decisions of other member countries
Consideration could be given to extending the operation of recognition of foreign judgements legislation so as to recognise lower court and tribunal decisions of other ASEAN Member States regarding disputes relating to consumer protection laws and regulations.
Model Law on Electronic Commerce
Consideration could be given to becoming a party to the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce 1996 and to give effect to relevant provisions of the Model Law though enacting legislation, if the Member has not already done so.
The Model Law requires ‘functional equivalence’ between the requirements for hardcopy documents and electronic documents. Consequently, it cannot be claimed the following requirements do not comply with the law simply because they were done in electronic form. Namely a legal requirement for: information to be given in writing, a signature, the production of a document, or the retention of a document.