busniess low
student123456
businesslow_home_market.docx1- Chris goes into Best Computer store looking for a new computer. He wants something that is top of the line and portable. After looking over everything in the store and talking to Pierre, Chris decides on a 1.3 kilogram-laptop with all the latest software. Pierre agrees to have the software loaded onto the laptop and to call Chris when it is ready so he can come back and pick it up. That night, after all the software is loaded and Chris was called, a group of robbers broke into the store and took all the computers in the back room, including Chris’s new laptop.
Who is responsible for the loss of the laptop, Best Computer or Chris? Explain your answer.
Answer Chris is responsible for the loss of the laptop since Pierre loaded the software to make the laptop in a deliverable state and notified Chris that the laptop was ready to pick up. According to rule 2 of the transfer of title under the Sale of Goods Act the title and risk of the laptop has been transferred to Chris the moment Pierre notified him that the laptop was in a deliverable state before the robbery took place.
If Chris has not paid for laptop yet then the contract can be voidable under force majeure which is beyond the power of both parties and the contract can be discharged by frustration since the essential element of the contract namely the laptop does not exist when Chris decided to pay for it.
After the first winter Doug and Bonnie noticed the bricks were blistering and flaking and that small holes were appearing on the surface of the bricks. They immediately contacted the manufacturer who told them that this was a normal part of the weathering process and did not constitute a defect in the brick. The manufacturer refused to send someone to the Jackson’s home to look at the bricks.
Doug then contacted an experienced mason to investigate the condition of the bricks. He told them that the bricks gad been improperly fired so that they lacked the durability to withstand the temperature extremes of freezing and thawing. He told Doug and Bonnie that the bricks would have to be replaced immediately as they would not withstand one more winter. When the Jacksons confronted the manufacturer with this information, the manufacturer sent its own mason to inspect the brick. It then sent a letter to the Jacksons stating that its mason had found nothing fundamentally wrong with the bricks and that there was no need to replace them.
Doug and Bonnie decided to take legal action against the brick manufacturer.
Required: Discuss the arguments, which will be raised by both the parties and render a decision.
Answer: Doug may argue that he made the purpose of the bricks clear to the sales representative and relied on the skills of the seller to supply him with the brick appropriate for the intended use. Under the sale of Goods Act there is an implied condition that the bricks provided shall be reasonably fit for the use intended, however the bricks started blistering and flaking after the first winter and a professional said that they were unfit. Doug can seek to repudiate the contract and recover the purchase price from the seller or get another good batch of bricks that fit the intended purpose including the cost of replacing the bricks.
The seller will argue under caveat emptor that it was Doug’s responsibility to examine the bricks and determine the quality and fitness for the intended purpose. The seller will also state that they did all necessary actions within their powers to inspect the brick and found they were in good condition and the blistering was a normal condition of the brick.
Court’s decision: The Sale of Goods Act protects the buyer if he has informed the seller of the purpose intended for the goods and relied on the skills of the seller to supply a suitable product. In this case Doug relied on the manufacturer’s skills to supply him with the bricks intended for the purpose. Doug can get the purchase price paid for the bricks from the seller or another good batch of bricks from the seller as a replacement for the defective bricks. Doug can also purchase the bricks from another seller and get the price of the new bricks from the seller and can obtain any extra costs incurred to replace the new bricks.
