Consumer protectionMisleading price indication - proof of offence - evidence of specific transaction not essentialDSG Retail Ltd v Oxfordshire County Council: QBD (Lord Justice Kennedy and Mr Justice Astill):16 March 2001In their shop the defendants displayed notices stating 'Price Check Prices - we can't be beaten we guarantee to match any local price Dixons', but omitted reference to the existence of conditions on the offer.

A customer, who had seen the notice and tried to buy certain goods he had seen at a considerably reduced price in another local store, complained to the council's trading standards department.

A trading standards officer visited the store, asked for the same goods and was told that the lower price could not be matched.

On a subsequent visit the officer saw several notices, some in the same general form and others setting out conditions to which the offer was subject.

Three allegations of offences giving a misleading price indication contrary to section 20(1) of the Consumer Protection Act 1987 were laid, two in general terms and one referring to specific goods at a specific price.

The defendants were convicted by the justices.

The Crown Court dismissed their appeals.

The defendants appealed.Frederick Philpott (instructed by DLA, Birmingham) for the defendants.

Karl Scholz (instructed by the Head of Legal Services, Oxfordshire County Council, Oxford) for the council.Held, dismissing the appeal, that although the interplay between the consumer and the store provided evidence by which it was possible to test whether a notice as to the price at which goods were available was misleading contrary to section 20 of the 1987 Act, it was possible to prove a section 20 offence without evidence of a specific transaction; and that it was unnecessary to circumscribe the evidence which could be relied upon to prove a section 20 offence.