A Contract for the Sale - Assignment Example

Question Goods must be ascertained When it comes to ascertaining ownership of goods, the act provides certain provisions pertinent to the issue. Subject to section 20A where in one could locate a contract for the sale of unascertained goods no property in the goods is transferred to the buyer up until the time the goods are ascertained. There are two conditions under this case. The first condition pertains to the even wherein there is the existence of a contract, therefore it is noted that for the sale of specific or ascertained goods the property in them is transferred to the buyer at such time as the parties to the contract are planning for its transfer. In the case of ascertaining the intention of the parties, both sides should take into consideration the terms of the contract, the conduct of the parties as well as the conditions of the case. Rules for ascertaining intention In case there are different intentions coming to play, the Sales of Goods Act provides a set of rules for ascertaining the intention of the parties as to the time at which the property in the goods is to be transferred to the buyer. The first rule indicates that there is an unconditional contract regarding the sale of definite goods in a deliverable state the property in the goods passes to the buyer upon the creation of the contract. Therefore, it considered immaterial upon the postponement of the time of payment or the time of delivery. The second rule states that provided that there is a contract for the sale of specific goods and the seller is bound to do something to the goods for the intention of transforming them into a deliverable state, the property does not pass up until the thing is done and the buyer received a notice that it has been done. The third rule, indicates that provided that there is a contract for the sale of specific goods in a deliverable state, the seller is bound to weigh, measure, evaluate or do some other act or thing with reference to the goods for the intention of ascertaining the price, the property does not pass until the act or thing is done and the buyer received the notice for its verification. In the case of the fourth rule, if the goods are delivered to the buyer on approval or on sale or return or other parallel terms the property in the goods passes to the buyer in the following situations: (a)      When he indicates his agreement or acceptance to the seller or does any other act adopting the transaction; (b)      If he does not indicate his agreement or acceptance to the seller but retains the goods without giving notice of refusal, then, if a time has been fixed for the return of the goods, on the expiration of that time, and, if no time has been fixed, on the expiration of a reasonable time. The last rule in this light indicates that if there is a contract for the sale of unascertained or future goods by description, and goods of that description and in a deliverable state are unreservedly appropriated to the contract, either through the seller with the consent of the buyer or by the buyer with the consent of the seller, the property in the goods then passes to the buyer; and the assent could be expressed or implied, and could be given either before of after the appropriation is made. In the case that Lacey would not be paying for the goods for some time, there are certain measures Micro-maker could venture on with reference to the risk of non-payment. The Sales of Good Act contains a provision with reference to the stipulations of time. Under the provision of the stipulations of time, it is noted that unless a different intention emerges from the terms of the contract, stipulations as to time of payment not essentially a part of the contract of sale. Another is that in case there are any other stipulation as to time is or is not of the essence of the contract depends on the terms of the contract. QUESTION 2 In case the goods were damaged in a fire while in the shop waiting to be sold, there is the conflict of who would bear the loss between the two parties. In this case we lay down the foundations of who takes responsibility of the goods in certain situations. Lacey is deemed responsible for the goods as it was provided with the acceptance provision of the act. (1) The buyer is deemed to have accepted the goods if: (a) when he intimates to the seller that he has accepted them, or (b) when the goods have been delivered to him and he does any act in relation to them which is inconsistent with the ownership of the seller. (2) Where goods are delivered to the buyer, and he has not previously examined them, he is not deemed to have accepted them under subsection (1) above until he has had a reasonable opportunity of examining them for the purpose— (a) of ascertaining whether they are in conformity with the contract, and (b) in the case of a contract for sale by sample, of comparing the bulk with the sample. In this case, it could be noted that where the contract is for the sale of goods making one or more commercial units, a buyer who has accepted any goods included in a unit is considered to have accepted all the goods rendering the unit. On the other hand in terms of being stolen in the process of delivery, unless otherwise agreed, the goods would stay at the risk of the seller until such time that the property in them is transferred to the buyer, however when the property in them is transferred to the buyer the goods would be considered at the buyers risk whether delivery has been done or not. Still there are still a few conditions that should be reminded of in terms of the accountability of each party: (1) But where delivery has been delayed through the fault of either buyer or seller the goods are at the risk of the party at fault as regards any loss which might not have occurred but for such fault. (2) Nothing in this section affects the duties or liabilities of either seller or buyer as a bailee or custodier of the goods of the other party. (3) In a case where the buyer deals as consumer or, in Scotland, where there is a consumer contract in which the buyer is a consumer, subsections (1) to (3) above must be ignored and the goods remain at the seller’s risk until they are delivered to the consumer. QUESTION 3 In the case that Micro-Maker delivers a consignment of general order microwaves to Lacey and Lacey discovered that they are a different model from the ones which were ordered, there are certain terms in which Lacey is privileged to do. Provided that Micro-Maker is not able to deliver the right consignment of the general order the act provides Lacey with the right of partial rejection. The right of partial rejection specifies that: (1) If the buyer— (a) has the right to reject the goods by reason of a breach on the part of the seller that affects some or all of them, but (b) accepts some of the goods, including, where there are any goods unaffected by the breach, all such goods, he does not by accepting them lose his right to reject the rest. (2) In the case of a buyer having the right to reject an installment of goods, subsection (1) above applies as if references to the goods were references to the goods comprised in the installment. Apart from this, it could be noted that is also not bound to return rejected goods unless it was agreed upon, where goods are delivered to the buyer, and he does not accept them. Given with this right, Lacey is also not bound to return them to the seller; however it is considered enough if he intimates to the seller that he refuses to accept them. QUESTION 4 Upon Lacey’s discovery that on some of the models of the microwave is slightly scratched on the outside rendering a possible dissatisfaction from the good, Lacey is provided with the right of examining the goods. Unless otherwise agreed, when the seller tenders delivery of goods to the buyer, he is bound on request to pay for the buyer a practical opportunity of examining the goods for the intention of ascertaining whether they are in accordance with the contract and, in the case of a contract for sale by sample, of comparing the bulk with the sample. Upon the breach of the quality and the damage to the product, the company could Question 5 and 6 The non-payment of the seller as referenced to the fact is when: (c) when the entirety of the price has not been paid or attended to; (d) When a bill of exchange or other exchangeable instrument has been received as conditional payment and the circumstance on which it was received has not been satisfied by reason of the dishonor of the instrument or otherwise. For this case, the seller is granted with the following rights: (1) Subject to this and any other Act, notwithstanding that the property in the goods may have passed to the buyer, the unpaid seller of goods, as such, has by implication of law— (a) a lien on the goods or right to retain them for the price while he is in possession of them; (b) in the case of the insolvency of the buyer, a right of stopping the goods in transit after he has parted with the possession of them; (c) a right of re-sale as limited by this Act. (2) Where the property in goods has not passed to the buyer, the unpaid seller has (in addition to his other remedies) a right of withholding delivery similar to and coextensive with his rights of lien or retention and stoppage in transit where the property has passed to the buyer. Upon transit there are also a number of rights the Sales of Good Act provides: (1) The unpaid seller may exercise his right of stoppage in transit either by taking actual possession of the goods or by giving notice of his claim to the carrier or other bailee or custodier in whose possession the goods are. (2) The notice may be given either to the person in actual possession of the goods or to his principal. (3) If given to the principal, the notice is ineffective unless given at such time and under such circumstances that the principal, by the exercise of reasonable diligence, may communicate it to his servant or agent in time to prevent a delivery to the buyer. (4) When notice of stoppage in transit is given by the seller to the carrier or other bailee or custodier in possession of the goods, he must re-deliver the goods to, or according to the directions of, the seller; and the expenses of the re-delivery must be borne by the seller. References: Alajoutsijärvi, K., Möller, K. and Rosenbröijer, C-J. (1999), “Relevance of Focal Nets in Understanding the Dynamics of Business Relationships,” Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, 6 (3), 3-35 Anderson, J. C. and J. A. Narus (1999), Business Market Management: Understanding, Creating, and Delivering Value. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Berryman, K., Harrington, L., Layton-Rodin, D. and Rerolle, V. (1998), "Electronic Commerce: Three Emerging Strategies," The McKinsey Quarterly, 1. Ford, D., Gadde, L-E., Håkansson, H., Lundgren, A., Snehota, I., Turnbull, P. and Wilson, D. 1998), Managing Business Relationships. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester. Hansen, M. A., Mathews, B. A., Mosconi, P. A. and Sankaran, V. (2001), "A Buyers Guide to B2B Markets," The McKinsey Quarterly, 2. James, R. (2000), "Good Chemistry between Suppliers and the Internet," Pulp & Paper 74 (November), 63-67. Koskinen, A., Lankinen, M., Sakki, J., Kivistö, T. and Vepsäläinen, A. P. J. (1995), Ostotoiminta yrityksen kehittämisessä (Procurement in Company Development). Weilin+Göös, Juva. Morris, M., Brunyee, J. and Page, M. (1998), “Relationship Marketing in Practice: Myths and Realities,” Industrial Marketing Management, 27 (4), 359-371. Mittilä, T. (2000), Relation Trine. Dissertation. Acta Universitatis Tamperensis; 768, University of Tampere. Mukerjee, K. and Palmer, J. W. (2000), Electronic Commerce in the Global Steel Industry: Current Trends and Future Prospects. Working paper. Möller, K. and Wilson, D. (1995), Business Marketing: An Interaction and Network Perspective. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Dordrecht, London Möller, K. & Halinen, A. (2000), "Relationship Marketing Theory: Its Roots and Direction" Journal of Marketing Management 16, 29-54. Sales of Good Act. (1979). Tinnilä, M. (1997), Division of Service and Business Processes. Helsinki: Helsinki School of Economics (HSE), Dissertation D-132. HSE Publications, Helsinki. Read More