Thursday, August 29, 2019

UK Commercial Law - Final Year Coursework Case Study

UK Commercial Law - Final Year Coursework - Case Study Example But, it is to be remembered that the law has made certain conditions to be fulfilled by the claimant which may turn to the triumph of the defendant. Before proceeding to render an advise to ITS, Firstly we shall examine the provisions of various Acts arises from this case and also we shall examine how it is wrought to help claim of ITS, the defendant. The general rule is that he purchaser of goods, which turn out to be defective, will sue in contract for breach of the terms implied by the Sale of Goods Act 1979, or the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982, which cannot be excluded against a consumer. In Donoghue v Stevenson (1) Lord Atkin stated that a manufacturer of products owes a duty to the ultimate consumer to take reasonable care in the preparation of the product. But as said above the law never is single sided correspond to the description and such goods shall be of merchantable quality.(2) This aspect is well explained in the case Varley Vs Whipp.(3) The term, "merchantable quality' means that the goods comply with the description, so that to a purchaser buying goods of that description the goods would be good tender. In Harlingdon and Leinster Enterprises Ltd v. Christopher Hull Fine Art Ltd (4) also the same point has been discussed. Moreover in Wilson v Rickett, Cockerell (5) by applying the purview of S. 14 (3) the court of Appeal held that where the seller sells goods in the course of a business and the buyer expressly or by implication makes known to the seller any particular purpose for which the goods are being bought, there is an implied condition that the goods supplied under the contract, are reasonably fit for that purpose whether or not that is a purpose for which such goods are commonly supplied, except where the circumstances show that the buyer does not rely, or that it i s unreasonable for him to rely, on the skill and judgment of the seller. a) In the course of the buisiness In the course of a business' in the context of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 s14 (2), where it limits the statutory implication of a term as to the quality of the goods to sales where sellers are acting 'in the course of a business'. However, a requirement of merchantability was only implied if the sale was made 'in the course of a business' and that remains the case in relation to satisfactory quality By applying the scope of the phrase 'in the course of business in Stevenson v Rogers (6) it was held that the meaning to be given to the phrase 'in the course of a business' came to be considered as a preliminary matter. But there is an exception this -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2.Sales of Goods Act 1979 3. Varley Vs Whipp 4. Harlingdon and Leinster Enterprise Ltd v Christopher Hull Fine Art

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.