Sale of Goods Act 1893 CASES
The Sale of Goods Act 1893 was landmark UK legislation codifying the law relating to the sale and purchase of goods, providing clear rules on contractual obligations and consumer rights.
Definition and Principles
The Act outlined the terms governing contracts for the sale of goods, establishing implied conditions and warranties regarding quality, description, title, and fitness for purpose.
Key Provisions
- Title and Ownership: Clarified when ownership and risk pass from seller to buyer.
- Implied Terms: Set default standards of merchantable quality and fitness for specific purposes.
- Remedies: Specified remedies available in cases of breach, including rights to reject goods, claim damages, or demand specific performance.
Modern Context
The Sale of Goods Act 1893 has largely been replaced and updated by subsequent legislation, notably the Sale of Goods Act 1979 and later consumer protection laws.
Practical Importance
Understanding historical foundations helps clarify modern contractual principles, illustrating the evolution of buyer-seller obligations and consumer protection.
Home » Sale of Goods Act 1893
Contaminated groundnuts were sold through a chain of contracts for use in animal feed, ultimately killing a farmer's pheasants. The House of Lords held that goods with a latent toxic defect are not of 'merchantable quality', establishing liability up the supply chain. Facts The case concerned a series of ‘chain’ contracts originating from Brazilian groundnut meal which was unknowingly contaminated with a fungus producing a poison, Aflatoxin. The meal was sold by importers (Gagniere & Co. and others) to merchants (Henry Kendall & Sons), who sold it to compound feed manufacturers (Grimsdale & Sons). Grimsdale used the meal to create
A dairy supplied milk contaminated with typhoid germs, causing the customer's wife's death. The court held the dairy company liable for breaching the implied warranty under the Sale of Goods Act 1893, confirming that the milk must be fit for consumption. Facts The plaintiff, Mr Frost, purchased milk daily from the defendants, The Aylesbury Dairy Company, for his family’s consumption. A pass-book was kept which contained a statement of the precautions taken by the defendants to ensure the purity of their milk. The plaintiff’s wife contracted typhoid fever from consuming the milk, which was found to be contaminated with typhoid
Facts The appellants, Arcos, Limited (‘the sellers’), entered into a contract to sell a quantity of Russian redwood and whitewood staves to the respondents, W. N. Ronaasen & Son (‘the buyers’), for the purpose of making cement barrels. The contract specified, amongst other dimensions, that the staves were to be of “1/2 an inch” thickness. Upon delivery, the buyers measured the staves and discovered that while they corresponded with the contract in other respects, a significant proportion did not conform to the specified thickness. Only around 5% of the staves were precisely 1/2 inch thick; the vast majority (over 80%)
