International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research
E-ISSN: 2582-2160
•
Impact Factor: 9.24
A Widely Indexed Open Access Peer Reviewed Multidisciplinary Bi-monthly Scholarly International Journal
Home
Research Paper
Submit Research Paper
Publication Guidelines
Publication Charges
Upload Documents
Track Status / Pay Fees / Download Publication Certi.
Editors & Reviewers
View All
Join as a Reviewer
Get Membership Certificate
Current Issue
Publication Archive
Conference
Publishing Conf. with IJFMR
Upcoming Conference(s) ↓
Conferences Published ↓
ISC-AISGF-TBRF
DePaul-2026
IC-AIRCM-T3-2026
NSSFIGTMA-2025
SPHERE-2025
AIMAR-2025
SVGASCA-2025
ICRTET-4
ICCE-2025
Chinai-2023
PIPRDA-2023
ICMRS'23
Contact Us
Plagiarism is checked by the leading plagiarism checker
Call for Paper
Volume 8 Issue 5
September-October 2026
Indexing Partners
From Regulation to Remedy: Bridging the Gap Between Dark Pattern Enforcement and Contractual Consent Under Indian Law
| Author(s) | Mr. Surya Haridas Menon, Mr. Utkarsh Vinay Shukla |
|---|---|
| Country | India |
| Abstract | The Central Consumer Protection Authority’s 2023 Guidelines on Dark Patterns, and its subsequent orders against platforms such as BookMyShow, IndiGo, and McAfee, mark a significant regulatory response to manipulative digital design. Yet this response operates almost entirely on a public-enforcement track: it penalises the platform without disturbing the individual transaction. A consumer who is “basket-sneaked” into a charitable contribution or auto-renewed into a subscription through a banned dark pattern gains no corresponding right, under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, to treat their own contract as voidable — that determination still turns on the considerably harder, fact-specific tests of fraud, misrepresentation, or undue influence under Sections 15 to 19. This paper argues that this is not a minor procedural gap but a structural failure to connect regulatory findings to contractual consequence, leaving the individual consumer without a private remedy even where the state has already established that their consent was engineered. Through doctrinal analysis of Sections 14, 16, and 19 of the Contract Act alongside the CCPA’s existing dark-pattern taxonomy, the paper examines whether “undue influence” can be judicially extended to interface-level manipulation, and draws on comparative approaches under the EU’s Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and California’s consumer-protection framework to test what a bridging mechanism might look like. It concludes by proposing a rebuttable presumption — triggered by a CCPA-classified dark pattern — against the validity of consent obtained through it, restoring the individual consumer’s contractual remedy alongside the regulator’s public one. |
| Published In | Volume 8, Issue 5, September-October 2026 |
| Published On | 2026-10-17 |
Share this

E-ISSN 2582-2160
CrossRef DOI prefix of IJFMR is 10.36948/ijfmr
All research papers published on this website are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, and all rights belong to their respective authors/researchers.
Powered by Sky Research Publication and Journals