Commercial Law: Sale of Goods - University of Wolverhampton

* Reardon Smith Line v Hansen-Tangen [1976] 1 WLR 989ii Whether sale ‘by’ descriptionBeale v Taylor [1967] 1 WLR 1193; [1967] 3 All ER 253Varley v Whipp [1900] 1 QB 513iii Severity of applicationArcos Ltd v E A Ronaasen & Son [1933] AC 470* Moore & Co and Landauer & Co, Re [1921] 2 KB 519* Reardon Smith Line v Hansen-Tangen (above)b Satisfactory qualityCase law on Merchantable Quality (the predecessor to satisfactoryquality)Aswan Engineering Establishment Co v Lupdine Ltd [1987] 1 All ER135; [1987] 1 WLR 1Bartlett v Sydney Marcus Ltd [1965] 1 WLR 1013* Beecham & Co Pty Ltd v Francis Howard & Co Pty Ltd [1921] VLR 428Bernstein v Pamson Motors (Golders Green) Ltd [1987] 2 All ER 220Brown (BS) & Son Ltd v Craikes Ltd [1970] 1 All ER 823; [1970] 1 WLR 752* Business Applications Specialists v Nationwide Credit Corporation[1988] RTR 332* Cehave NV v Bremer Handelsgesellschaft, The Hansa Nord [1975] 3 All ER 739Crowther v Shannon Motor Co [1975] 1 WLR 30* Geddling v Marsh [1920] 1 KB 668Jackson v Rotax Motor and Cycle Co [1910] 2 KB 937Kendall (Henry) & Sons v William Lillico & Sons Ltd [1969] 2 AC 31* Mash & Murrell Ltd v Joseph I Emmanuel [1962] 1 WLR 16Rogers v Parish (Scarborough) Ltd [1987] QB 933; [1987] 2 WLR 353Shine v General Guarantee Corp Ltd [1988] 1 All ER 911(Note: consider whether these cases would be decided the same wayunder the new test of ‘satisfactory quality’: SGA 1979: s14, assubstituted by s1 SSGA 1994.)(Note also the additional protection to the consumer given by s3 of theSale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002 whichinserts new subss(2D) to (2F) into s14(2).)c Fitness for purposei Communication of purposeAshington Piggeries Ltd v Christopher Hill Ltd (above)Crowther v Shannon Motor Co [1975] 1 WLR 30Grant v Australian Knitting Mills Ltd [1936] AC 85* Manchester Liners v Rea [1922] 2 AC 74Priest v Last [1903] 2 KB 148* Saphena Computing Ltd v Allied Collection Agencies Ltd [1995] FSR 616 (CA)Slater and Others v Finning Ltd [1996] 3 WLR 190; [1997] AC 473 (HL)ii Reliance on seller’s skill and judgmentCammell Laird & Co Ltd v Manganese Bronze & Brass Co Ltd [1934] AC 402Kendall (Henry) & Sons v William Lillico & Sons Ltd (above)* Teheran-Europe v S T Belton Tractors Ltd [1968] 2 QB 545iii Compliance with s14(3)Boyter v Thompson [1995] 2 AC 628; [1995] 3 WLR 36; [1995] 3 All ER 135 (HL)* Wormell v RHM Agricultural (East) Ltd [1987] 1 WLR 1091 SGA 1979: s14(3)Note: this is unaffected by SSGA 1994 or by the Sale and Supply of Goods to ConsumersRegulations 2002.iv Conformity with sample* Drummond (James) & Sons v E H Van Ingen & Co (1887) 12 App Cas 284