Saņem informāciju par jaunajiem Atlants.lv darbiem!
Akcija: ZiņotājsPRO uz 6 mēnešiem - bezmaksas!Abonēt bez maksas
Law for Business
|3.||Consumer Protection Legislation||6|
Sections 12 to 15 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 imply terms which favour the buyer into contracts of sale of goods. These terms do not need to be mentioned by the buyer or the seller as the Act will automatically imply them (Maclntyre, E).
Vera asked you if her car would be suitable to tow caravan and she was assured by you that it would be. A local garage told her that she had burned her clutch out as her car was far too small to tow the caravan. In this case, you have breached section 14(3) of the Act which provides 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’’ (Maclntyre, E). Vera was relying on the skill and judgement of you, she told you the purpose for purchase. The case for this situation is Bolan v Friern Hospital (1957) 1 WLR 583.
You have breached section 13 (1), which states that where there is a contract for the sale of goods by description, there is an implied term that the goods will correspond with the description. The words used must be words of description rather than words identifying the goods (Maclntyre, E). In the advertisement it was said that there is a built-in microwave in the caravan. But there was not. The case for it is Harlington & Leinster Enterprises Ltd v Christopher Hull fine Art Ltd (1991) 1QB 564.
At the first moment it looks that you have breached section 13(1) (mentioned above), because the sofa did not transfer into a single bed (Reardon Sith Line v Hansen Tangen (1976) 1 WLR 989). But at the same time Vera did not mention that it is very important for her. The condition applies only if the buyer makes known the particular purpose for which the goods are wanted (Baldry v Marshall (1925) 1KB 260) (Rowley, G, Stevenson, J.E., Greene B, Blakehore, T).
- Analysis of Article 38 of the International Court of Justice / Starptautiskās Tiesas 38. Reglamenta analīze
- Law for Business
- The EU Constitution
E-pasta adrese, uz kuru nosūtīt darba saiti:
Saite uz darbu: