Content area
This dissertation explores the legal standards of proportionality and reasonableness within consumer protection laws, particularly in online sales contracts. It examines the challenges in applying universal principles to ensure a fair balance between consumers and traders in digital transactions. While legislative norms establish explicit consumer protection obligations, they often fall short in addressing rapid technological and market changes. The study argues that proportionality and reasonableness serve as crucial legal standards that can enhance consumer protection beyond rigid legislative frameworks.
Through a comparative legal analysis of European Union law and Peruvian consumer protection legislation, the dissertation evaluates how these principles interact with allocative efficiency and the Consumer Welfare Hypothesis. The research suggests that legal reasoning frameworks based on these principles can provide a more adaptable and balanced approach to online sales contracts, mitigating informational asymmetries and power imbalances between consumers and provider or traders.
The dissertation also examines the limitations of national legal frameworks, emphasizing the importance of international legal harmonization in online consumer protection. Finally, it proposes a conceptual model for legal reasoning that integrates economic and legal theories to enhance fair contractual practices and market competition while safeguarding consumer rights.