Difference between revisions of "Contracts for Sale of Goods (11:III)"

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 109: Line 109:
==== e) Implied Condition of Merchantable Quality: s 18(b) ====
==== e) Implied Condition of Merchantable Quality: s 18(b) ====


Under s 18(b), if: (1) goods are bought by description, and (2) from a seller who deals in goods of that description, the seller is bound by an implied condition that the goods are of merchantable quality, except to the extent that the buyer has examined them.  
Under s 18(b), if:  
# Goods are bought by <u>description</u>, and  
# From a <u>seller who deals</u> in goods of that description, the seller is bound by an implied '''condition''' that the goods are of merchantable quality.  


===== (1) The Concept of Merchantable Quality =====  
===== (1) The Concept of Merchantable Quality =====  


The concept of merchantable quality is difficult to define. A commonly used test, the '''price abatement''' test, asks whether a reasonable buyer, informed of the actual quality of the goods, would buy the goods without a substantial abatement of price (''BS Brown & Son v Craiks Ltd'', [1970] 1 All ER 823 (HL)). If the informed reasonable buyer would not buy without a substantial abatement of price, unmerchantable quality is inferred, and repudiation may be available.  
The concept of merchantable quality is difficult to define. A commonly used test, the price abatement test, asks whether a reasonable buyer, informed of the actual quality of the goods, would buy the goods without a substantial abatement of price ([https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1970/1970_SC_HL_51.html ''BS Brown & Son v Craiks Ltd'', [1970<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 All ER 823 (HL)]). If the informed reasonable buyer would not buy without a substantial abatement of price, unmerchantable quality is inferred, and repudiation may be available.


Any damage to goods beyond the de minimus range, may be said to render the goods of unmerchantable quality (''[https://www.canlii.org/en/sk/skca/doc/1925/1925canlii154/1925canlii154.html?autocompleteStr=International%20Business%20Machines%20v%20Shcherban&autocompletePos=1 International Business Machines Co Ltd v Shcherban]'', [1925] 1 DLR 864 (Sask CA), [1925] 1 WWR 405).  
Any damage to goods beyond the ''de minimus'' range may be said to render the goods of unmerchantable quality ([https://www.canlii.org/en/sk/skca/doc/1925/1925canlii154/1925canlii154.html?autocompleteStr=International%20Business%20Machines%20&autocompletePos=2 ''International Business Machines v Shcherban'', [1925<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 DLR 864 (Sask CA), [1925<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 WWR 405]).


Section 18(b) applies to the sale of used goods as well. However, there is a lower standard here: the goods must be usable but not perfect. A minor defect does not necessarily render the goods unmerchantable. See ''Bartlett v Sidney Marcus Ltd'',[1965] 2 All ER 753 (Eng CA).  
This section also applies to the sale of '''used goods''', as well (s 18(b)). However, there is a lower standard here: the goods must be usable but not perfect. A minor defect does not necessarily render the goods unmerchantable. See <u>''Bartlett v Sidney Marcus Ltd'', [1965] 2 All ER 753 (Eng CA)</u>.


In any case, where the buyer seeks recovery of the full purchase price based on the implied condition of merchantable quality, he or she should be cautioned that continued use of the goods in question seriously weakens the argument that the goods are not fit for a particular purpose, or are not of merchantable quality.
In any case, where the buyer seeks recovery of the full purchase price based on the implied condition of merchantable quality, they should be cautioned that continued use of the goods in question seriously weakens the argument that the goods are not fit for a particular purpose or are not of merchantable quality.


===== (2) Sale by Description =====
===== (2) Sale by Description =====


Section 18(b) only applies to a sale by description. This is usually not a problem since most sales are by description, except where the buyer is clearly buying a particular item on the basis of qualities known to him apart from any representations.  
This section only applies to a sale by description (s.18(b)). This is usually not a problem since most sales are by description, except where the buyer is clearly buying a particular item on the basis of qualities known to them apart from any representations (see d) Implied Condition of Fitness for Buyer's Purpose: s 18(a) above).


===== (3) Seller who Deals in Goods of that Description =====
===== (3) Seller who Deals in Goods of that Description =====
Line 135: Line 137:
===== (5) Implied Condition of Reasonable Durability =====
===== (5) Implied Condition of Reasonable Durability =====


The goods must be durable for a reasonable period of time with regard to their normal use (s 18(c)).  
The goods must be durable for a reasonable period of time with regard to their normal use (s 18(c)).


==== f) Implied Conditions in Sales by Sample: s 19 ====
==== f) Implied Conditions in Sales by Sample: s 19 ====
5,109

edits

Navigation menu