Intent to deceive is not required to run a foul of Guam consumer protection act

Late last year the Guam Supreme Court issued a little-noticed ruling that could have major ramifications for businesspeople in general and developers in particular. The ruling which came in the case of Mendiola v. Bell has the effect of dramatically increasing exposure to legal liability under the Guam Consumer Protection Act . . .

This content is available only to subscribers. If you are a member, please log in.


Share This Post