Question

A customer goes into a pharmacy complaining of “hay fever” (an allergy that is caused by pollen of dust) which includes symptoms of runny nose and watery eyes (but is not due to a cold). A pharmacist, maintaining that he had the same medical issue, in the shop suggests a certain brand. The pharmacist maintained that “it worked for him.” The customer buys a six-month supply (180 capsules with each of six boxes containing 30 capsules). The customer takes the capsules for 30 days and finds no relief from his hay fever despite the promise of the medication is one of the most effective treatments for hay fever on today’s market. In fact, the pharmacist directed the customer to the medication that he knew to be most costly and least effective. Later, the customer returned to the pharmacy insisting on returning the remaining 5 packets of 30 capsules per packet. The pharmacy refused on the grounds that the policy of the pharmacy is that all sales are final and no returns/exchanges are possible.

Q1 In law, how would the statements of the pharmacist be classified? Briefly explain (maximum 30 words)

Answer 1

As is clear from the contract, that pharmacist is insisting him (customer) that the drug is most effective in curing fever. He also took him that this drug is least cost effective than the other options available. The pharmacist assures him that he will feel better off after talking the medicine. But the customer after taking medicine doesn't feel better and he came back to return the remaining boxes.

The statement made by the pharmacist doesn't have any legal background. The pharmacist needs to take the medicine back. The brand as suggested by pharmacist doesn't cured the hay fever. The pharmacists statement does not have any justification legally.

Hope you got the answer.

Kindly comment for further explanation.

Thanks ?