Sale of Goods Act 1979 CASES
The Sale of Goods Act 1979 consolidated and modernised English law governing the sale and purchase of goods, replacing and updating the earlier 1893 Act. While many consumer-related provisions have since been superseded by the Consumer Rights Act 2015, the 1979 Act continues to apply primarily to business-to-business (B2B) transactions and private (non-consumer) sales.
Definition and Principles
This Act regulates contracts involving the transfer of ownership in goods from seller to buyer, outlining key rights, duties, and remedies. It introduced clearer protections and aligned the law with contemporary commercial practices.
Key Changes from the 1893 Act
- Implied Terms Strengthened: Enhanced implied conditions ensuring goods are of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose, and match their description.
- Commercial Clarity: Improved clarity regarding seller obligations, particularly around quality and fitness for specific purposes.
- Remedies Clarified: Clearly outlined remedies available to buyers, including rights to reject defective goods or demand repair and replacement.
Current Applicability
- Primarily governs B2B sales and private transactions.
- Consumer transactions now governed by the Consumer Rights Act 2015.
Practical Importance
Understanding the 1979 Act remains crucial for businesses to clearly define their rights and obligations, promoting fair trade and reducing disputes in commercial transactions.
Home » Sale of Goods Act 1979
An art dealer bought a painting described as being by Gabriele Münter but later found it to be a forgery. The court held it was not a sale by description as the buyer, being experts, relied on their own assessment, not the seller's description. Facts The plaintiffs, Harlingdon and Leinster Enterprises Ltd, were art dealers specialising in German Expressionist paintings. The defendants, Christopher Hull Fine Art Ltd, were also art dealers but not experts in this specific area. The defendants offered for sale two paintings described in a catalogue as being by the German Expressionist artist, Gabriele Münter, for £6,000
Facts The claimant, Mr. Bernstein, purchased a new Nissan Laurel motor car from the defendants, Pamson Motors, for £8,000. Three weeks after taking delivery, having driven the car for 140 miles, the engine completely seized while he was on the motorway. The car was towed to a service station and then back to the defendants’ premises. The cause of the failure was identified as a piece of sealant that had blocked the oil supply to the camshaft, which was a latent defect present from the time of manufacture. This constituted a clear breach of the implied condition of merchantable quality
