Commercial Law: Sale of Goods - University of Wolverhampton

More documents

Recommendations

Info

iii Instalment contracts* Maple Flock Co Ltd v Universal Furniture Products (Wembley) Ltd [1934] 1 KB 148THE RIGHT TO DEMAND REPAIR OR REPLACEMENT OF THE GOODS OR REDUCTION OFPURCHASE PRICE OR RESCISSIONSGA 1979: Pt 5A and s48A–F as inserted by s5 of the Sale and Supplyof Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002DAMAGES* Bence Graphics Ltd v Fasson UK Ltd (1996) The Times 24 OctoberCoastal (Bermuda) Petroleum Ltd v VTT Vulcan Petroleum SA (No 2),The Marine Star [1994] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 629 (QBD)* Hall (R & H) Ltd and W H Pim & Co’s Arbitration, Re [1928] All ER Rep 763* Lambert v Lewis [1982] AC 225* Tai Hing Cotton Mill v Kamsing Knitting [1979] AC 91Vitol SA v Norelf Ltd [1995] 3 WLR 549; [1996] 3 All ER 193 (HL)* Wertheim v Chicoutimi Pulp Co Ltd [1911] AC 301* Williams v Agius [1914] AC 510SGA 1979: ss51, 53 and 54Also see ordinary contractual principles with respect to mitigation, remoteness etc.Commercial Law: Sale of GoodsOTHER REMEDIESWait, Re [1927] 1 Ch 606SGA 1979: s52GENERALSGA 1979: ss27–54Remedies of sellerPROPRIETARY REMEDIESi LienMount v Jay & Jay Co Ltd [1960] 1 QB 159SGA 1979: ss39, 41, 42, 43, 47 and 61(4)ii Right of stoppage in transit* Bethell & Co Ltd v Clark & Co Ltd (1888) 20 QBD 615Booth Steamship Co Ltd v Cargo Fleet Iron Company Ltd [1916] 2 KB 570SGA 1979: ss44, 45, 46 and 47iii Right of resaleWard (RV) Ltd v Bignall [1967] 1 QB 534SGA 1979: s48Note: the relationship between ss48 and 24.iv Retention of titleAluminium Industrie Vaasen BV v Romalpa Aluminium Ltd [1976] 1 WLR 676; [1976] 2 All ER 552Armour v Thyssen Edelstahlwerke AG [1990] 3 WLR 810; [1990] 3 All ER 481 (HL)Bond Worth Ltd, Re [1980] Ch 228Borden (UK) Ltd v Scottish Timber Products Ltd [1981] Ch 25Clough Mill Ltd v Martin [1985] 1 WLR 111Pfeiffer (E) Weinkellerei-Weineinkauf GmbH & Co v Arbuthnot Factors
Ltd [1988] 1 WLR 150SGA 1979: s19PERSONAL REMEDIESi Action for the price* Stein, Forbes & Co Ltd v County Tailoring Co Ltd (1916) 86 LJKB 448* Workman Clark & Co Ltd v Lloyd Brazileno [1908] 1 KB 968SGA 1979: s49ii Damages for non-acceptanceCharter v Sullivan [1957] 2 QB 117; [1957] 2 WLR 528* Lazenby Garages Ltd v Wright [1976] 1 WLR 459Shearson Lehman Hutton Inc v Maclaine Watson & Co Ltd (No 2) [1990] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 441Thompson (WL) Ltd v R Robinson (Gunmakers) Ltd [1955] 2 WLR 185SGA 1979: s50GENERALSGA 1979: ss27–54Cases marked with an * can be found in your Textbook; all other casescan be found in your 150 Leading Cases.Self-Study Questions1 When may a buyer recover loss of profit when the seller fails to deliver?2 What are the limits on the buyer’s right to demand repair orreplacement of faulty goods and on the buyer’s right to claim areduction of the purchase price or rescission of the contract?3 What is an unpaid seller? What are such a person’s rights?4 If an unpaid seller resells, will the new buyer receive good title?5 What is the difference between a right of resale and a power of resale?6 Why would a seller want a reservation of title clause?Sample Questions1 ‘The ultimate real remedy an unpaid seller may exercise in relation to the goods is the right of resale.’Describe the real remedies of the unpaid seller and discuss the circumstances in which the right ofresale will arise, explaining the effects of the resale on the original contract of sale.(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning, May 1999, Question 3.)2 ‘A retention of title clause (sometimes known as a Romalpa clause) is much more limited inits application that it had originally been believed.’Discuss.(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning, May 2001, Question 3.)
Page 1 and 2: Distance Learning Module PlannerCom
Page 3 and 4: How to Use Your Module PlannerThe M
Page 5 and 6: Topics Covered by ModuleThis module
Page 7 and 8: A Brief Guide to Study SkillsAs a d
Page 9 and 10: Introduction to Study UnitsThe Stud
Page 11 and 12: Study Unit 1 Suggested minimum stud
Page 13 and 14: Self-Study Questions1 What is a con
Page 15 and 16: Wardar’s (Import and Export) Co L
Page 19 and 20: * Ruben (E & S) Ltd v Faire Bros Lt
Page 23 and 24: Sample Questions1 ‘Between them,
Page 25 and 26: When may the consumer demand rescis
Page 29 and 30: 1 Discuss whether s25 Sale of Goods
Page 31 and 32: SELLER’S EXCUSES FOR NON-DELIVERY
Page 33: Study Unit 7 Suggested minimum stud
Page 37 and 38: Learning Project for Sale of Goods:
Page 39 and 40: IMPLIED TERMS IN SUPPLY OF GOODS AN
Page 41 and 42: Suresh’s, Anna, who was visiting
Page 43 and 44: should have been discussed and appl
Page 45 and 46: have a power to sell goods but here
Page 47 and 48: RevisionWhat to reviseConsider care
Page 49 and 50: the exam. Then go back over your re
Page 51: Module QuestionnaireCommercial Law:

Commercial Law: Sale of Goods - University of Wolverhampton

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?