Legal Rules on Implied Terms in Sale of Goods and Services

This case study analyzes and advises Mr. John on the legal rules on implied terms relating to the sale of goods and supply of services. It also discusses the statutory provisions on transfer of property and buyer and seller's remedies. Additionally, it explores product liability for faulty goods. The study provides insights into the Consumer Rights Act and relevant sections of the Sales of Goods Act 1979.

Case study

Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................4
MAIN BODY...................................................................................................................................4
Analyse and advice Mr John on the legal rules on implied terms relating to the sale of goods
and supply of services..................................................................................................................4
Statutory provision on transfer of property and possession.........................................................6
Statutory provision on buyer and seller’s remedies in SOGA 1979............................................7
Product liability statutory provision for faulty goods..................................................................7
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................9

INTRODUCTION
The consumer Right act is the act which has been given by Parliament that exists in United
Kingdom. Parliament has consolidated the existing consumer protection act, rules and
regulations and has also provided consumers with various benefits and remedies. This law came
into force on 9 July 2015. Section 9 of the act deals with that quality of the goods are to be
considered as appropriate when they met out the set standards and also they do not possess any
defect, they are safe, durable. The quality of the good is not considered up to the mark when
quality of products is unsatisfactory and draws upon the owner’s attraction before the dealing is
actually made. Present report Analyze and advice Mr. John on the legal rules on implied terms
relating to the sale of goods and supply of services. It will also advise him on the statutory
position on transfer of property.
MAIN BODY
Analyse and advice Mr John on the legal rules on implied terms relating to the sale of goods and
supply of services
From the case study it has been analysed that Mr. John has bought the new Television set
recently. The store manager has mentioned to Mr. John that the TV set he is going to purchase is
of very high quality. It is durable and will create value for money to him. This aspect was also
mentioned on the Television set. After getting satisfied from Mrs Sarah, Mr. John purchased 42
inches TV set with remote control. It was told to consumer that TV set will be delivered to him
in next 3 days (Ponsford, 2017). MR. john analysed that TV set worked firmly in the starting 3
weeks but after that one day there was flush and Puffs of smoke coming out from TV. The TV
was being installed by engineers and also they have made MR. John signed the documents that
the shop will not be responsible if he founds any default after the installation of Television set,
they will not be responsible.
Section 13
In this case Mr. John is advised according to consumer rights regulation 2015, Section 13 it
has been identified that goods which is being sold by the shopkeeper or trader must be described
by them even if consumer can see or detect the product from the shelves of shop. This section
ensures that any change in description after entering into the contract will make the contract null
and void. Where goods are held out as a sample then section 13 will be breached if the full goods
supplied do not match that sample or they have a defect which makes their quality unsatisfactory

(under section 9) and which the consumer would not have discovered by a reasonable
examination of the sample goods. So Mr. John can ask for claim as the Television set which is
given to him is Unsatisfied and is not of high quality. Also according to sales of goods act 1979,
consumer can reject the goods and ask for full return if the standard of goods are not being
matched by the description given by trader.

Section 9 and 10
Mr. John can ask for full return from Mrs Sarah even if he has signed the documents that
shopkeepers will not be responsible for the defects after the installation process has been
completed. This act also makes clear that consumer can involve in asking for remedies if the
standard quality of goods and services that is being provided to them does not match the aspects
and always ask for remedies for the services being supplied to them by traders (Neary, 2016).
Section 9 and 10 also implies that consumer will be provided with the remedies from the trader
for the Breach of consumer law so that the compliance can be improved and the future possibility
of re-occurring of such events can be reduced (Giliker, 2017). Also according to consumer
regulation act 2015, remedies must be given to provide consumers with more information so that
they can improve their choice so that it can enhance functioning of market for consumers and
other businesses. Subsection 9 and 10 also explains that Mr. John cannot recover or claim for the
remedy if the loss being faced by him more than once. He can only seek the damages which is
faced by him. Mr. John can ask Sarah to repair or re-install the goods.
Section 16
From the section 16 of the act it has been analysed that when the digit content is being
transferred in one product and the rights are not meant being fulfilled then this basically means
that goods are of low standard and quality and Mr. John has full right to ask for total refund from
trader. The act defines that there is no right to reject the digital content, they are only subjected to
remuneration, refund or the repair. The defective goods can be rejected with the reasonable
period that is 30 days (Krasniqi, 2018). Trader will be liable for all the damages that is attached
to supplying of low quality digital content. Mr. John can also be involved in pursuing other
traditional remedies and also can claim for specific performance. Also the services must be
delivered by Sarah by taking reasonable care so that no harm can be caused to product. So Mr.
John is advised that he needs to have word with Sarah for the de-graded quality of goods that is
being supplied to him. Mr. John ask for full return from Sarah as the breach of Contract has
taken place. He can also file suite of remedies against Sarah. Mr. John also have the right to
reject the Television set as the standard quality has not being met out. Also this section explains
that the goods that is being transferred to the consumer must match the model which has being
viewed by them on shop, if this aspect is not being fulfilled then customer can reject the contract.

Statutory provision on transfer of property and possession
Transfer of property is much more depended upon the negotiation, as seller sells goods to
the buyer and purchasers makes negotiation with the trader so that individual can get the item in
reasonable amount.
Section 13 of sales of goods act 1979
This section states that whenever there is contract between buyer and seller then vender
gives brief description of the item. It is the implied condition that buyer will get the same good
as per the description made by seller. If the person is not getting that same goods, then individual
has right to file case against the seller.
In the case of Mr john, he paid for TV and store manager has described all the features
and facilities of that television. It was described by the staff that it is durable and has high
quality. It was assumed by Mr John that he has paid the amount worth of that TV but it was not
there. Harlington & Leinster v Christopher Hull Fine Art [1991] 1 QB 564 is the example of
section 13. Here in the same case claimant has paid money 6000 for the painting but he received
the fake painting of described artist. As this painting was sold by saying that it is made by
Munter the famous painter which was not right. Here in the same case of Mr john as well TV
was sold by giving wrong description as it was not having quality hence was found bad. Hence it
is breach of implied term and buyer means Mr John has right to claim for selling the wrong good
to him.
Section 16 of SOGA 1979
This is the section that states that seller must sell the ascertained goods and if it is not
there then seller cannot transfer the rights of property to another person. Here TV was not up to
the mark or it was found unsatisfactory hence Mr. John has right to claim for his right and get the
amount for the same.
Statutory provision on buyer and seller’s remedies in SOGA 1979
As per the provision which is been declared as the time when the seller has the breach of
contract as per the implied termed of the of SGA, the buyer will have entitling wit remedy which
is mainly depended on the type of term beached.
Damages- this is considered to be most common remedy which is been available in sale of goods
act as it is considered to be right which is claimed by innocent party. There is amount f
compensation which is been fixed by court to put the innocent party against by financial position.

As Mr. John have paid for the TV which is later considered to be damages, which makes gain
more innocent and provide the right to get over all compensation whether if he has signed the
paper of installation.
The next is that the repudiation of contract which gave right to buyer in order to have the
rejection of goods along with having complain within reasonable developmental of time. The
court have already described the level of reasonable cases time n developing the different level
of circumstances of the variant cases. It was described by the staff that it is durable and has high
quality. It was assumed by Mr John that he has paid the amount worth of that TV but it was not
there.
The next is about existence of additional remedies which have major consideration as per
consumer sales where the seller has the intended responsibility to have providence of
replenishments and reinstalment of goods and services. Rescission is putting the parties back in
their pre-contractual position (the buyer gives back the goods and the seller gives back the
purchase price).
Product liability statutory provision for faulty goods
The product has the claim which is based on the more level of grounds which have the major
level of backgrounds that are as per negligence, consumer protection act 1987 along with fatal
accidents act 1976 and contract. The major which have to be discusser as per the mention case of
Mr John is all about the negligence and consumer protection act 1979.
The negligence is all about the to have dealing with claim that the who have the major suffering
which is in caused because of damage products. There is maintenance of the legislation risibility
which is considered to be more level of defectiveness to be implemented.
The primary remedy for a claim in negligence will generally be damages for the losses sustained
by the claimant.
There is consistent of the strict audibility which is likely to be more claim as the negligence
must have the revealing over beaching of the duty of care which is making the good as to be
more level of difficulty and considered to audibility in payment.
As per the above case it can be stated that Mr. John have the full right to get the real placement
of goods whether he has signed the paper but due to negligence. As this painting was sold by
saying that it is made by Munter the famous painter which was not right. Here in the same case

of Mr john as well TV was sold by giving wrong description as it was not having quality hence
was found bad.
CONCLUSION
From the above study it can be concluded that described by the staff that it is durable and
has high quality. It was assumed by Mr John that he has paid the amount worth of that TV but it
was not there. It is breach of implied term and buyer means Mr John has right to claim for selling
the wrong good to him. He can only seek the damages which is faced by him. Mr. John can ask
Sarah to repair or re-install the goods. MR. John signed the documents that the shop will not be
responsible if he founds any default after the installation of Television set, they will not be
responsible.

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Giliker, P., 2017. The Consumer Rights Act 2015–a bastion of European consumer rights?. Legal
Studies.37(1). pp.78-102.
Krasniqi, A., 2018. Legal divergences in terms of customer rights in Kosovo. Tribuna
Juridică.8(2).pp.541-552.
Ponsford, M., 2017. The Lawful Access Fallacy: Voluntary Warrantless Disclosures, Customer
Privacy, and Government Requests for Subscriber Information. Canadian Journal of Law
& Technology.15. p.1.
Neary, M., 2016. Teaching Excellence Framework: a critical response and an alternative
future. Journal of Contemporary European Research.12(3).
Bridge, M.G., 2017. The international sale of goods. Oxford University Press.
Lista, A., 2016. International Commercial Sales: The Sale of Goods on Shipment Terms. Informa
Law from Routledge.
Taylor, S., 2018. UK Sale of Goods Legislation 1893-2015: Towards Plain (er) Language?. ASp.
la revue du GERAS. (74).pp.95-112.
Kumar, A., 2016. 32_Textbook on Sale of Goods and Hire Purchase (2010).