Sale of Goods Act and Implied Terms in Contracts

This article discusses the Sale of Goods Act 1979 and the implied terms imposed on contracts involving sale of goods and services. It explains the provisions and limitations of the act, including the sale of goods by description and sale of goods by sample. The article also covers the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and its impact on the Sale of Goods Act. References to relevant cases are provided.

Running Head: CORPORATIONS LAW
CORPORATIONS LAW
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note

1
CORPORATIONS LAW
The Sale of Goods Act can be defined as an act of the parliament of the United Kingdom.
The Sale of goods act governs the English Contract Law and Commercial law related to the sale
of goods and services. The sale of Goods Act 1979 had consolidated the former Sale of Goods
act 1893. It is to be mentioned that in contracts of sale of goods and services certain basic
provisions are imposed by the Sale of Goods and Services Act 1979 in order to ensure that
protection is provided to the purchasers in the contracts. One of the main provisions as imposed
by the aforementioned act is that goods must correspond with their descriptions and in terms of
quality and quantity. Such provision protects the right of the buyer to not be deceived by the
seller.
There are many implied terms that are imposed on a contract involving sale of goods and
services by the Sale of Goods Act 1979 under section 12 – 15. The implied terms imposed on
contract by the aforementioned act are:
 Section 12- This section states that in case of a sell of goods the seller must have the title
of the goods and the right to sell the goods. In case of an agreement, the seller must
possess the right to sell the goods involved at the time of transfer of the property.
 Section 13- This section of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 states that the goods sold must be
of satisfactory quality. Further it can be said in accordance with the section that where
sale of goods is done by sample, the bulk amount goods sold must correspond with the
quality of the sample.
 Section 14(2) - This section states that goods sold by the contract of sale must be of
satisfactory quality.
 Section 14(3)- This section of the aforementioned act states that the goods sold by a
contract of sale of goods must be fit for the purpose of the buyer.

2
CORPORATIONS LAW
 Section 15- According to this section it can be said that a contract for sale of goods is
considered to be a contract for sale of goods by sample if there is an express or implied
term stating the same. However, the bulk goods must correspond with the quality of the
goods provided in the sample and that the bulk goods would be free from any defect.
Sale of goods by description
As discussed above in section 13 of the Sale of Goods Act 1997 any contract which involves
sale of goods by description, the goods must correspond with the description. In case of sale of
goods by sample the bulk goods must correspond with the quality of the sample as provided in
section 15(2). However, subsection 13(3) of the aforementioned act states that when a contract
for sale of goods is made by description as well as by sample, the bulk of goods must correspond
with the sample as well as with the description. It is to be mentioned that sale of goods by
description can be of two types:
 Unascertained future goods
 Specific goods
Unascertained future goods – This type of contract involving sale of goods have been defined
by the courts as one in which the buyer purchases the goods that he has not seen
Specific Goods- In case of sale of goods by description which are specific, three limitations
are imposed. They are as enumerated below:
 The goods sold must be identified by their description- In sale of goods by
descriptions the descriptive words that identify the goods will be held to be a part of the
sale by description. The courts differentiate descriptive words which are related to the

3
CORPORATIONS LAW
attributes of the goods and descriptive words which are related to the identity of the
goods by the referring to section 13 of the Sale of Gods Act. The description of identity
of the goods only comes under the scope of section 13. The case Ashington Piggeries Ltd
v Christopher Hill Ltd [1972] AC 441 (HL) is a notable one which deals with the
identification of goods by description. In this case the words ‘Norwegian herring meal’
identified the good while the words ‘fair average quality of the season’ had been held to
be descriptive words which provided information about the attributes of the goods. As the
good sold was a Norwegian meal, it was held by the court that section 13 of the sale of
goods act had not been breached.
 The buyer has the right to purchase the goods relying on its description- For
claiming that the goods purchased by the buyer did not correspond with the description of
the goods the buyer must establish that he relied on the description while buying the
goods. The best example of this limitation has been illustrated in the case of Harlingdon
& Leinster Enterprises Ltd v Chris Hull Fine Art Ltd [1990] 3 WLR 13. In this case
it was held by the court that sale was not by description as the claimant did not rely on
the description, instead relied on the expertise of its employee.
 Any term of the contract which contains words of description of the goods will form
a part of the sale – After establishing that the goods had been identified by description
and that the buyer had relied on such description, it is important to establish that
description of the goods constitutes a term of the contract and not a mere representation
as held in the case T&J Harrison v Knowles & Foster [1918] 1 KB 608 (CA). Mere
representations will not be considered to be part of the description. Thus it is important to
differentiate between representations and description.

4
CORPORATIONS LAW
It can be mentioned that if the description of the gods are detailed, the seller has the
obligation to supply the goods corresponding to such description as held in the case Acros v
Ronaasen [1933] AC 470. In this case woods of ½ inch had to be supplied. However some of
the wooden planks were thicker. Thus it was held that it was a breach of section 13.
The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 governs imitations of the implied clauses of the
Sale of Goods Act. However, the unfair contract terms Act 1977 prevents the exclusion of
sections 13 and 15 of the sale of the sale of goods Act where the buyer is treated s a consumer.

5
CORPORATIONS LAW
Reference List:
Acros v Ronaasen [1933] AC 470
Ashington Piggeries Ltd v Christopher Hill Ltd [1972] AC 441 (HL)
Harlingdon & Leinster Enterprises Ltd v Chris Hull Fine Art Ltd [1990] 3 WLR 13.
T&J Harrison v Knowles & Foster [1918] 1 KB 608 (CA)
The sale of Goods Act 1979
Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977