Be that as it may, Part 1 does not only restate existing law, it also introduces many changes and developments. The most notable of these is the insertion of a chapter with regard to digital content. This adjustment is something that was greatly needed on the grounds that digital content did not fit squarely into the traditional categories of goods (as digital content is usually licensed and not sold) or services (where a mere requirement for digital content to be provided with reasonable skill and care does not go far enough to protect consumers in the event of faulty digital products). In a world that is becoming more and more digitalised in every aspect of our lives, updating and adopting legislation in that matter appears indispensable. The institution of tailored quality rights with reference to digital content and remedies in the case that these rights are not met (similar to those which apply to traditional goods and services), the CRA 2015 has steered and guided the law of consumer rights into the digital age. In relation to digital content which fail to meet the statutory standards, consumers have the right to require the trader to repair or replace the item within a reasonable time and a right to a price reduction and refund.
However, in contrast to goods remedies, the right to reject intangible digital content is not available to consumers for the reason that “digital content cannot be returned in any meaningful sense”. Likewise, there is no statutory limit on the number of repairs or replacements that the trader has to undertake in order to make the digital content conform. However, this cannot be carried on indefinitely as the repair or replacement must be done within a reasonable time without causing significant inconvenience to the consumer. In addition, except where the trader had no right to supply the digital content, for example of a pirated content, there is no right to reject non-conforming digital content and obtain a refund of the price.
