• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

sale of goods act 1979

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Student no: 0507943 A sale of goods contract refers to an agreement in which the seller or a trader transfers or agrees to transfer property that are goods to the buyer for a money consideration best known as price. Both the seller and the buyer have obligations to one another. The seller's obligation under the contract must be that he or she agrees to transfer the property to the buyer whereas the buyer's obligation under the contract is to pay a money consideration, as described by s2 (1) of the Sale of Goods Act 19791 In regards to the s14 of The Sale of Goods Act 19792, the rule of caveat emptor is of great relevance, the buyer must be aware since the vendor does not have to be held liable for the faults in goods sold if the buyer had made a look out to satisfy himself or herself of the goods worthiness. There it is the responsibility of the parties in contract to constitute their own bargain However the section does not imply any warranty or condition as to the quality or fitness for any particular purpose of goods supplied under a contract of sale, unless a warranty or condition is appended by the usage of trade as referred by s14(3). ...read more.

Middle

a right to claim for damages or rescind the contract above that an oral statement constitute an actionable misrepresentation when it misleads a written representation. Such a situation was exemplified in Curtis v Chemical Cleaning and Dyeing Co Ltd[1951]1 KB 80511 when a store assistant accepted a dress from a consumer for cleaning but innocently misrepresented that the exemption clause on the receipt included covering for beads and sequins although it included all materials damage. s.14(2) of the Sale Of Goods Act 1979 tend to protect the seller where the defects of the goods complained of had been specifically drawn to the buyers attention before the contract was sealed SOGA s.14(2c)(a).It is the responsibility of the seller to be specific when drawing the defects of the good to the buyers attention, the mere fact of mentioning that the goods have defects is not sufficient, as it was demonstrated in the case of Bartlett v Sidney Marcus [1965] 2 All ER 75312,where Lord Denning of the court of Appeal held that the implied conditions under s14(1) and (2) of the Sale Of Goods Act 1893 that the car was fit reasonably to be driven along the road and that it was of merchantable quality were applicable although there was no evidence whatsoever to support the findings of the County Court Judge that there were vivid breaches of the implied condition.Hence,the buyer failed to claim damages under s.14(2). ...read more.

Conclusion

As of the Rogers case the purchased a new Range Rover which proved to be of unsatisfactory quality and then had it replaced by another new Range Rover which after using it for a period of six month and the reading of the mileage being 5000miles but since there were no specifications of duration in the warranty then it was still in reasonable time. In concluding to the matter of the Rogers case in relation to the provisions of ss.14 and 5A of the Sale of Goods Act 1979, the plaintiff is entitled to repudiate the contract since his expectations of purchasing a new Range Rover were not met since it was not just another family car but a car that is on top of the range.Hence, maximum comfortability, ease in handling and pride in the general outlook is of expectations. 1 Sale of Goods Act 1979 s2(1) 2 Sale of Goods Act 1979 s14 3 [1987]1 QB 933 4 Sale of Goods Act 1979 s13 5 [1900]1 QB 513 6 [1967]1 WLR 1193 7 (1999)3 WLR 163 8 Sale Of Goods Act 1979 s14(2) 9 ibid 10 [1925]1 KB 260 11 [1951] 1 KB 805 12 [1965] 2 All ER 753 13 Ibid Mustill L.J 14 48A(1) 15 48C(2) ?? ?? ?? ?? ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Commercial Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Commercial Law essays

  1. Limited liability

    i) Rules related to share capital The provisions related to share capital39 were introduced in order to provide a margin of safety for creditors and to give managers and major shareholders an incentive to maintain the company` s solvency. Since the company has been held to have a separate legal personality,

  2. To what extent is the rule contained in the Salomon v. Salomon & Co. ...

    was the parent company the 'head and brains' of the trading venture? 4. did the parent company govern the adventure? 5. were the profits made by the subsidiary company made by the skill and direction of the parent company?

  1. Both the common law and statute make it too easy for buyers to reject ...

    in fact their choices may be informed on an artificial basis for sellers' interests. The objectives of the movement are probably best approached by wide education of consumers in the community. Although law plays a small part of educative role, consumer education is not the prime function of law which protects the consumer.

  2. There are three legal functions of a bill of lading; 1. ...

    Paper bills of lading have been around for centuries and therefore are a tried and tested method. There are many advantages of the use of paper bills, Yiannopoulos (1995, p17) highlights that they allow for the easy transfer of goods as well as being reliable documented collateral.

  1. Free essay

    Legal Environment - Popeye v Spinach Tankers Ltd. The appellant claimed damages under the ...

    Aids to Interpretation Intrinsic: S.1(1) S.1(1)(a) S.1(3) Extrinsic: Capital Allowances Act 1968 - S.31 Hovercraft Act 1968 - S.4(1) Merchant Shipping Act 1894 - S.458, S.503 Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 Case Law - Davie v New Merton Board Mills Ltd [1959] Yarmouth v France [1887] Munby v Furlong (Inspector of Taxes)

  2. The Criminal Justice Act 1993 (CJA) and the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 ...

    the legislation to secure convictions thus led to criticism of UK's sole reliance on the criminal law to regulate insider dealing.[9] The heavy burden of proof in relation to insider dealing offence was due to the fact that there is a thin border between legal and illegal insider dealing practices.

  1. The key to section 13 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 is interpretation.

    In the Oscar Chess Ltd v Williams[9] the Court of Appeal held that the statement about the age of the car was a mere representation. Also, the court added that Oscar Chess was a car dealer and was in a better position with a better knowledge of the cars than the defendant.

  2. Section 205 of the companies Act 1963 provides a comprehensive remedy for aggrieved shareholders. ...

    The court was satisfied that such exclusion amounted to oppression under s 205, regardless of the capacity held by petitioner, even though the case was decided upon other grounds. This distinction is important, as it is often the case that a shareholder of a company may also be a director

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work