Nobody downloaded yet

Case Study on Liability for Supply Defective Product - Coursework Example

Comments (0) Cite this document
Summary
Case Study on Liability for Supply of Defective Product Question 1 ISSUE Whether Paul Price is entitled to claim damages for the defective product under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 as amended by the Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994? Is the Exclusion clause limiting the liability will be of any help to Tefal?…
Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER91.7% of users find it useful
Case Study on Liability for Supply Defective Product
Read TextPreview

Extract of sample
"Case Study on Liability for Supply Defective Product"

Download file to see previous pages Paul Price has the right to demand for the repairing of the Actifrys or ask for a replacement or demand for a credit note. If any customer has incurred any pecuniary losses due to usage of such faulty products, the retailer has the every responsibility to make good the loss sustained by Paul Price. Under Limitation Act 1980, a customer has up to six years to initiate legal proceedings against the retailer for the supply of defective product.(Bhatia, 2008:458). APPLICATION The Sale of Goods Act (Amended) will be applicable to all transactions where products are transferred for a consideration or price. Contracts of sale may be either implied or expressed with stipulations concerning any contract, or refer to mere consumer contracts. Nonetheless, once it has been decided that the Sale of Goods Act is applicable to a transaction, there are some stipulations implied in the sale by the Act. A seller cannot avoid these stipulations. For each sale of products, the Sale of Goods Act 1979 stipulates that wherever there is a sale of products by depiction, there exists an implied stipulation simultaneously that the products offered will have to be identical to their description. Thus, the seller must offer the consumer what has been advertised. S.13 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (amended) is applicable to all sales, whether by business or individuals. Anyone who offers a product to another will be covered. S.13 is applicable to all products with no concern over purchasing scenario. S.13 is a significant section as it offers the right to a consumer either to obtain a refund or to reject a product. The consumer has the right either to accept or reject a product and is not at the mercy of a seller. S.30 of the Act offers protection to a consumer where the products are not corresponding to the description, and also offers a relief to the buyer if the quantity or description of the products differs from what has been advertised or requested. S.14 of the Act stipulates that product sold should be of merchantable quality. If a consumer purchased the product after 2003, he has every right to request either to repair or replace the defective products within 6 months of receiving the products. (Bryan, 2009:16). Even if the shop where the purchase was made had included an exclusion clause limiting liability, still the shop cannot escape from the liability to Paul Price. Exclusion clause cannot offer any protection to the seller even when exclusion clause tries to shun accountability to consumers. The sellers usually will incorporate the exclusion clause into the contract by trying to have a blanket avoidance of any accountability to the buyers for any detriment, loss, injury or damage and even in case of death. In the majority of cases, courts have declined to implement such clauses if they are not brought to the attention of the buyer at the time of signing the contract or if the exclusion clause imposes unduly exorbitant or onerous penalties. Further, as the exclusion clauses are so damaging to the rights of the consumers, courts will always have narrow interpretation, and this is known as “contra proferentem“ rule under English Law. (Jones & Benson, 2011:298). In “Curtis v Chemical Cleaning Co [1951] 1 KB 805” ...Download file to see next pagesRead More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
  • CHICAGO
(“Case Study on Liability for Supply Defective Product Coursework”, n.d.)
Case Study on Liability for Supply Defective Product Coursework. Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/business/1451416-introduction-to-business-law
(Case Study on Liability for Supply Defective Product Coursework)
Case Study on Liability for Supply Defective Product Coursework. https://studentshare.org/business/1451416-introduction-to-business-law.
“Case Study on Liability for Supply Defective Product Coursework”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/business/1451416-introduction-to-business-law.
  • Cited: 0 times
Comments (0)
Click to create a comment or rate a document
CHECK THESE SAMPLES - THEY ALSO FIT YOUR TOPIC
Civil Liability and Self-Defence
...Civil Liability and Self-Defence Advice to Bill about the Physical Assault Committed by Alex I will advise Bill to file a complaint for civil damages against (1) Pumps and Pipes, the temporary employer, (2) Jobs Galore, the labour contractor and employment agency of Alex, and (2) Alex herself for having concluded a hasty but unfounded judgment which prompted her to hit Bill. While there was physical injury or battery, I will not counsel Bill to file a criminal action against Alex because there was no malicious intent on the part of the latter when she hit Bill albeit Alex is still civilly liable under the principles of the law on torts. On the basis of the attendant facts, it would appear on the surface that Alex...
10 Pages(2500 words)Case Study
Capital Gains Tax Liability
...Capital Gains Tax Liability Case Study Word Count 544 Esteemed Client: I have been working in the Tax Services Division of DV Chartered Accountants for two years. It was brought to my attention that you needed some counsel on some rather important matters and I am here to now assist you. I took some notes regarding the meeting which I wish to share with you. First of all, you own 50% of your property. This is equity. With equity you can do many things, such as make purchases against your equity. The fact that you have a house on the beach in Marmion also helps you in the sense that you completely own (jointly, I might add) a residence. This is not only valuable because you singularly own the property, but also...
6 Pages(1500 words)Case Study
Liability for an Employees Assaults
...Introduction In general employers are vicariously liable for the torts of their employees provided the tort is committed in the of employment. Employers are not usually liable for damages in respect of the criminal conduct of their employees, unless an employee performs his duties in a criminal manner. Tom Barnes' conduct appears to amount to both tortuous and criminal infractions. On the facts of the case for discussion AFS is not liable to pay compensation to Margaret Simpson but they may be liable to the fellow employee for damages in respect of injuries sustained in an altercation with Tom Barnes. The discussion that follows explains why. Vicarious Liability Vicarious liability is a legal concept assigning responsibility... to an...
10 Pages(2500 words)Case Study
Global product
...millions when they adopted the Straight Extension approach and tried to barge in on the new markets' sensibilities, disregarding the cultural and social nuances. For example, when Philips introduced its large capacity coffee makers in Japan, it found few takers, though Japanese liked coffee and drank it at home too. (Philip Kotler, 2000). It was soon discovered that as Japanese kitchens are smaller, and the Japanese culture is biased towards zero wastage and preservation of food, Philips coffee makers were not welcomed there. By reducing the size of the product, Philip was finally able to make profits in this market. In India, where there is still problem of regular electricity and water supply in even...
8 Pages(2000 words)Case Study
Criminal law: liability for manslaughter
...Criminal Law Consider Joe's liability for manslaughter in the following separate circumstances. Joe is the father of Fern, who is 6 years old. Kelly is her mother. (A) Fern and Joe are out in the local town, visiting the shops. Fern repeatedly runs into the road and is in danger of being hit by vehicles. Joe warns her of the danger and repeatedly tells her not to do this. Finally, Joe loses his temper and hits* Fern. This results in Fern falling to the pavement and hitting her head, causing an injury from which she dies 2 weeks later. (* Assume for the purpose of this question that this constitutes an offence). (B) Kelly tells Joe that he is not the natural father of Fern. Joe loses his temper and strangles Kelly. In...
6 Pages(1500 words)Case Study
Consider Criminal Liability
...Criminal Theft Act 1968 Criminal Liability of John and Jane ____________ _________ ID: __________________ Dated: May 11, 2007-05-11 The English Theft Act of 1968 casts the net of fraud wide enough to include anyone who obtains ownership or possession of any kind and by any means of property by a fraudulent deception1. The Model Penal Code takes a more conservative line, insisting upon the transfer of 'property' as an element in theft by deception. (Cartwright, 1999, p. 84) John according to the s1 Theft Act 1968 is found guilty of theft as he is depriving others from their property and particularly in the case where he steal 'roses' from one of his neighbours he is purely acting dishonestly depriving the...
6 Pages(1500 words)Case Study
Criminal Liability
...Criminal Liability Discussion Introduction There are several people who would be to possible criminal liability within this case. They are Jon, the doctor who treated Ian, Joe and the woman who came across Jon's car accident. Possible Criminal Liability for Jon The following discussion of Jon assumes that either he was charged before his untimely death in the car crash, or that he was not killed in the first place, There are two acts on the part of Jon which raise possible criminal liability: 1) Realization that the gym equipment he was responsible for was faulty but forgetting to tell anyone. 2) Deliberately not telling Ian about the faulty weights, hoping that he...
4 Pages(1000 words)Case Study
Occupational Safety and Liability
...CASE STUDY #1, HRD 394 Occupational Safety & Liability 1) What is behavior safety? Behavior based safety refers to the scientific application of behavior change to the real world issues. It is a set of programs that monitor an employee’s behavior as the cause of almost all workplace accidents. This safety technique focuses on what people do analyses why they do it, and then comes up with ways to control and restore what people do (Austin, 2000). A successful Behavior Based Safety uses science to study behavior change and rules out assumptions or personal feelings. According to the case study, Behavior Based Safety focuses on the behavioral initiatives an employee recruits to ensure they are safe at the workplace. The...
2 Pages(500 words)Case Study
Occupational Safety & Liability
...CASE STUDY #2, HRD 394 Occupational Safety & Liability, April 11, Based on the facts of the case, a safe workplace was described as conformingto an injury free workplace. Workplace safety was defined as “the working environment at a company and encompasses all factors that impact the safety, health, and well-being of employees. This can include environmental hazards, unsafe working conditions or processes, drug and alcohol abuse, and workplace violence” (US Legal, Inc., 2014, par. 1). As such, one is convinced that the comprehensive definition of a safe workplace should extend beyond focusing on it being injury free – which is only one facet in adhereing to the standards of safety as prescribed by the Occupational Safety...
1 Pages(250 words)Case Study
Liability & Negligence
...of a faulty product in case of product liability (Bernhard, 2012). The pilot however does not need to prove that the aircraft was faulty. In this case, strict liability will make the manufacturer of the Cessna 337 liable for the pilot’s accident. The manufacturer can also be liable for the pilot’s accident as a result of negligence. If the manufacturer did not provide enough warnings of the dangers of the flight, he will be held liable for the accident. The manufacturer is also liable for the pilot’s accident because he could have taken the flight for a test to ensure that it was in good condition. The pilot will be found liable for his accident due to various reasons....
3 Pages(750 words)Case Study
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.
Let us find you another Coursework on topic Case Study on Liability for Supply Defective Product for FREE!
Contact Us