Table of ContentsSale by DescriptionSatisfactory QualityFitness for PurposeThe Sale of Goods Act (SGA) 1979 regulates the sale of goods in the United Kingdom and imposes contractual conditions which are provisions forming part of a sales contract. There are several implied terms codified in the SGA; title to the property, absence of encumbrances and encumbrances, quiet possession, correspondence with the description, quality, fitness for use and correspondence with the sample. The implied terms have been put in place to work in the buyer's favor. The three implied terms that I will focus on in this essay are: sale by description (S13(1), satisfactory quality of the goods (S14(2) and fitness for purpose of the goods (S14(3). I will examine the 's accuracy of whether these implied terms work to the buyer's advantage. Say No to Plagiarism Get Custom Essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Section 13(1) of the SGA 1979 states that sale by description must be complied with where a contract is made to sell and "the goods will correspond to the description" given. (1A) of the SGA 1979, the implied term is a condition This term allows the party to terminate the contract, claim damages or continue the contract This condition will apply to the seller who sells the goods. whether in the course of a commercial activity or not, and in situations where the buyer has not seen the goods but is relying solely on the description "Sale of Goods by Description". " has no legal definition and it is therefore necessary to examine the plain and ordinary meaning of the words. The words must correspond to the description given at the time of creation of the contract by either party; the seller describing the product or in any written description such as packaging/display signs If the goods have not been verified, the description will be material to the Buyer in determining whether the Seller has fulfilled its obligation in providing the goods. good goods Descriptive words are terms of the contract which identify the goods concerned The description must have sufficient influence in the sale to become an essential condition of the contract. that if the goods purchased from the seller are not as described, the buyer may bring an action for breach of section 13(1). If the buyer was acting as a consumer, he will have the right to claim from the seller. seller ; repairs/replaces the goods, reduces the price of the goods or terminates the contract. The buyer also has the right to refuse the goods if he has not accepted them. However, if he has accepted the goods, failure to comply with the condition will be treated as a breach of warranty. Regardless, the buyer is protected by the SGA and benefits from it, because if the buyer asks the seller to repair or replace the goods, the seller must do so within a reasonable time. In this way, no inconvenience is caused, which is to the buyer's advantage as no time is lost in replacing or repairing the goods, allowing the buyer to fully enjoy the good as soon as possible. A sale will not be possible. be by description simply because the descriptive words were used during the negotiations; for it to be a description, the buyer must rely on the words to enter into the contract. In Beale v Taylor 1967, the buyer realized that the car obtained was not as described after purchasing it. As the buyer hadbased on this, it was a sale of property by description. The buyer could bring an action for breach of the condition implied by section 13(1). This case illustrates how the implied term benefits the buyer. Even if the buyer had relied on the description, bought the car and taken it away, he was still able to claim damages because he was protected by the implied terms. Another example of how the condition of sale by description is advantageous to the buyer is Arcos v Ronaason 1933. The wooden staves supplied did not match the description given, although they were still usable. The buyers were entitled to refuse the moats because they relied on the description of which the sellers had not complied with the implied terms. Lord Atkin asserted that "a ton does not mean about a ton or a yard about a yard." It highlights the strict approach in commercial law that if the buyer expects the goods to match the description given, that is what they should receive. If the item does not correspond to the description, the buyer is entitled to claim damages. This protects the rights of the buyer, protecting them from sellers who do not fulfill their obligations, whilst demonstrating the strict approach. In Harlingdon and Leinster 1991 the strict approach to statutory interpretation was illustrated. The seller said he was not an expert on paintings and so the buyer relied on his own judgment and purchased the painting later, realizing it was fake. The buyer attempted to claim a breach of Article 13(1), but as the seller denied his lack of knowledge, the buyer could not have relied on the description given. This sale was not made by description. It can be argued that this application of the strict legislative approach reintroduces the notion of caveat emptor (buyer beware) in relation to professional buyers. Lord Justice Nourse proposed that “the description must have sufficient influence on the sale to become an essential condition of the contract”. When the seller gives an opinion on the goods sold, this does not constitute a statement of fact. Therefore, as the seller stated that he knew nothing about the painting, the buyer could not make a claim as he did not rely on the seller's description. Lord Justice Nourse held that section 13 was "superfluous", as the existence of a sale by description depends on whether the buyer has relied on it, making it a condition of the contract. This illustrates that implicit conditions do not always work in buyers' favor. Strict application of section 13(1) may be disadvantageous to the buyer because the section states the obvious and is interpreted as it clearly stands. Harrington defines Article 13 as a reliance placed by the buyer on the seller. Therefore, the balance of bargaining power has tipped in favor of the seller, who can now easily circumvent Article 13 by pleading ignorance at the time the contractual agreement was entered into. The buyer must now be aware of what the seller says and does, which brings caveat emptor into play and undermines the buyer's power. Lord Justice Stuart-Smith pointed out that "there is a serious defect of law if the effect of a condition implied by law could be excluded by the seller claiming that he was not an expert in what was sold".Satisfactory qualityArticle 14(2) of the SGA 1979 contains the implied term referring to the quality of the product concerned. This article states that "where the seller sells goods in the course of a commercial activity, it is implicitly intended that the goods supplied in the course of thecontract are of satisfactory quality". Until 1994, satisfactory quality was called merchantable quality, meaning that the goods were salable according to the contract description given. This quality was replaced by the Sale and Supply of Goods Act , which amended section 14(2) of the SGA 1979. Satisfactory quality includes the following: fitness for purpose, safety, durability, appearance and finish, and freedom from minor defects is implied as a condition, so if the goods supplied do not conform to this implied term, a breach will be established. The buyer will have the right to reject the goods, claim damages and interest. will have the right to terminate the contract A buyer who does not examine the goods before entering into a contractual agreement tends to be in a stronger position than one who inspects the goods Although this may seem strange, it is. is simply the effect of section 14(2C)(b). Therefore, the buyer should either not inspect the goods he intends to purchase at all, or if he does inspect them, he should do so thoroughly. This generally does not work in the buyer's favor, as those who are ready to purchase a property will want to check it out thoroughly. However, it is possible that they overlook a defect during the inspection. This is especially the case in situations where the buyer would need to examine the property externally, internally or mechanically. If the goods purchased "meet the standards which a reasonable person would consider satisfactory, having regard to any description of the goods, the price and all other relevant circumstances", they will be of satisfactory quality and therefore there will be no need to deposit a claim under section 14(2) of the SGA The reasonable person must be in the buyer's position (with their knowledge) as it would not be appropriate for the objective test to be that of a reasonable third party who. does not have the same knowledge The goods will be of satisfactory quality if a reasonable person so judges, taking into account the quality in relation to the definition of the SGA It is the responsibility of the seller to sell goods which are in. a satisfactory quality condition If the seller does not comply, the buyer will have the legal right to claim What is considered satisfactory will depend on the purchase price, description, etc. is known as second-hand, the buyer cannot expect the item to be in perfect condition. The goods must only be of satisfactory quality. Therefore, the buyer cannot do anything within his power to assert a claim. The implied condition regarding satisfactory quality will not operate in favor of the buyer if he has examined the goods before a contractual agreement is made. In Thornett v Beers 1919 the purchaser carried out an examination and in doing so lost protection from section 14 of the SGA despite its examination being insufficient to have detected a defect. Furthermore, if the buyer proves that he is not relying on the seller's description, he can rely on the words for the purposes of section 14(3). Yet a claim under Article 14(2) may be excluded by the wording of the review provision. If a seller fails to meet the implied condition of satisfactory quality, the buyer will have the right to seek relief, such as rejection of the goods if it has not accepted them. If he has accepted the goods, failure to comply with the conditions will be treated as a breach of warranty. The buyer has the advantage of asking the seller to repair or replace the goods. This will be done within a reasonable time and without causing inconvenience to the buyer. This reasonable period.