Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Consumer Contracts - Coggle Diagram

- - - - Sections 11-15: those sections are now substituted (rest of SOGA 1893 still stands) as follows (IMPLIED CONDITIONS OF SALE):
        
        Section 11: when a condition is to be treated as a warranty.
        (GOOD TITLE, BASICALLY=NOT STOLEN OR CHARGED AS SECURITY) Section 12: implied undertakings as to title etc. i.e. implied condition that the seller has the right to sell the goods and an implied warranty that the goods are free from charges and encumbrances save for those listed in Section 12(2). Cannot contract out of, unless under Section 55(4).
        (AS DESCRIBED)
        
        Section 13: sale by description: where there is a contract based on a description, the goods correspond to this and, if by sample, correspond to sample. Breach means the goods are rejected and claim price even if no damage done to monetary value of the goods: Moore v Landauer. Description is essential term of the contract even if p has the opportunity to inspect the goods: O’Connor v Donnelly. Cannot contract out, unless under Section 55(4).
        (MERCHANTABLE QUALITY AND FIT FOR PURPOSE)
        
        Section 14: implied undertaking as to quality or fitness where goods are sold for a specific purpose Section 14(2) goods are of merchantable quality; and Section 14(4) fit for purpose. Where goods are sold in the course of business, there is an implied conditions re merchantable quality (Bernstein v Pamson Motors) and should be reasonably fit for purpose, where buyer specifies particular use, (Wallis v Russell) and the buyer must rely on seller’s skill (Draper v Rubenstein). Griffiths v Conway: p had abnormally sensitive skin and contracted dermatitis from wearing a coat. P failed to disclose condition to vendor and was unable to recover for breach of fitness for purpose. Merchantable quality means goods should be fit for purpose of that kind which are commonly bought and as durable as it is relevant to expect having regard to any description applied to them, the price (if relevant) and all other relevant circumstances. L’Estrange v Graucob: machine purchased with clause that excluded liability for express or implied warranties. Merchantable quality does not apply to private sales, but is also not limited to consumer sales though. Does not apply where the defect was brought to their attention or where on inspection they would have detected it. Merchantable quality is determined by age and price. The condition is displaced as regards defects specifically brought to the buyer’s attention before the contract is made; and if the buyer examines the goods before the contract, as regards defects which that examination ought to have revealed. Previously, the case law restricted the purchaser from relying on this implied condition e.g. when the goods were sold by description so that some goods had a ‘particular purpose’, but now this phrase is interpreted to mean the same as /common purpose’, so e.g. Wallis v Russel would now come under Section 14(2) rather than Section 14(4). Jewson v Boyhan- Section 14(2) is directed particularly towards the sale of sub-standard goods.
        (GOODS SHOULD CORREDPOND TO SAMPLE)
        
        Section 15: Sale by sample: Section 15(2) implies a condition for the sale of goods sold by sample.n