Consumer Protection Sale of Goods Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Consumer Protection Sale of Goods - Essay Example Upon seeing the advertisement in the Old Castle newspaper regarding the racquet, which read: " This is a fantastic new tennis racquet specially designed for beginners. Its unique anti-scratch finish means that however many times you knock it, scratch it, drop it, the scratches will not show. Your racquet will look as good as a new after many years of use. are implied in a contract of sale: the goods much match the description; the condition of the goods must be satisfactory; there must be satisfactory quality; and lastly, the good must be 'reasonably fit' for the purpose for which the consumer is buying them.1 Each of these terms must conform to the contract of sale. In this case Jim had, upon joining the Old Castle Racquets Club (hereafter, ORC) and seeing the advertisement, decided to purchase the SS after paying his yearly fee of 200 to ORC and signing up for a sex week period of tennis lessons at a price of 120. Completing his transactions at ORC Jim immediately went to Old Castle Sports and Leisure (hereafter, OSL) and purchased a SS racquet for 250, paying in cash. Jim's dissatisfaction arose when after only several weeks of using the SS, contrary to the advertisement's assertions and the warranty which came with the SS the surface had become very scratched and by week three the racquet was totally unusable when the handle came off. In determining the remedies available to Jim it is necessary to show that there was a breach of contract which leads us back to the four terms of a contract: description, condition, quality and fitness. In Harlingdon & Leinster Enterprises v Christopher Hull Fine Art Ltd [1991] 1 QB 5642 the court found that "for the sale to be 'by' description the description had to be influential in the sale so as to become an essential term or condition of the contract." In Jim's the case the description (i.e. the advertisement) was an essential reason he purchased the SS as evidenced by his actions and speed with which he viewed the advertisement and the immediately proceeded to OSR to purchase the SS. Also, in Beale v Taylor [1967] 3 All ER 2533 the court found that "the buyer was entitled to damages because, although the description of the goods were not false to the knowledge of either the seller or the buyer, yet fundamentally the seller was selling goods of the description advertised." As i n Jim's case even if the seller (OSL) was unaware that the advertising of the SS was wrong, Jim had purchased the SS based on that description. Satisfactory condition4 is the next term to consider which relates to satisfactory condition.5 Rogers v Parish (Scarborough) Ltd [1987] QB 9336 found that the court upheld that goods unfit7 for use purchased are unmerchantable. As in Jim's case, he purchased an expensive racquet for the sole purpose of taking lesson and playing tennis. The inherent quality issues rendered the SS unmerchantable. In Stevenson v Rogers [1999] 1 All ER 6138 on appeal the court held that