COMMERCIAL LAW2
ii. Applying the case of R v Kylsant [1931], Jack may file a suit against Mary by claiming
damages for misrepresentation regarding facts.
iii. In this instance, applying sub section 2 of section 14 as provided in the Sale of Goods Act
of the year 1979, it may be said that jack may file a suit against Mary for defective
product and the quality not fulfilling the statutory requirements of the aforementioned
Act. Applying Bernstein v. Pamson Motors Ltd [1987] 2 ALL ER 220, Mary may raise
the defense that second hand product appeal lower expectation in relation to the quality.
iv. Applying sub section 1 of section 21 as mentioned in the aforementioned Act, it may be
said that Jack shall have no title to the car, although he may file a suit against Mary for
damages.
Problem 2
Issue
The primary issue in the given scenario is whether Caroline would be successful
regarding her claim, and if she is able to succeed, then what damages may be received by her.
Rule
The case of British Leyland UK Ltd v Swift [1981] IRLR 91 is a significant case in
connection to the provided situation. In this specific case, a suggestion has been forwarded that
the question that should be asked by the judges is whether any particular reasonable employer, in
relation to the circumstances of the case, would have discharged or dismissed the employee.
The case of Airbus UK Ltd v Webb [2008] IRLR 309 shall be regarded as a relevant case
in connection to the provided circumstance. In this specific case, it was stated that an adequate

+13062052269

info@desklib.com

Commercial Law Problems with Solutions 2022

Contribute Materials

Related Documents

Free Business & Corporate Law Essay Example 2022