Implied Terms in Section 14-17 of Sales of Goods Act 1957
List and explain five(5) implied terms as laid down in Section 14 to Section 17 of Sales of Goods Act 1957.
Implied terms are terms normally not stated or not known by the parties, and may be derived from Custom or Usage, Court, or Statute. Custom terms are referenced to conventions or usages in a particular industry or trade. Next, Court terms are adopted when an oversight of the parties occur, in order to give ‘business efficacy’ to the contract based on prior or past dealings. Then, Statute terms are referred to the various states, territories and Commonwealth Trade Practices Act when the contract is formed. But in ...view middle of the document...
The seller had breach the condition as to title.
Next, the implied term is implied warranty that buyer shall have quiet possession of the goods. In Section 14 (b) SOGA 1957, it states that in a contract of sale, there is an implied warranty that the buyer shall have and enjoy quite possession of the goods. For example, Amy sold her car to Ann, but Amy liked the car very much. She often persuaded Ann to lend her the car and used the car with the spare car keys whenever she like regardless of whether Ann needed the car or not. Thus, Amy has breached the implied warranty that Ann should have and enjoy quite possession of the car. In the case of Heng Long Motor v Osman (1994), a van was bought by took a loan from a financial institution to finance the purchase. Sometimes later, the van was confiscated by the Royal Custom and Excise for an investigation. Both the buyer and the financial institution then initiated legal action against the seller on the ground disturbance of use. The court ruled against the seller on the basis that the seller had failed in his duty to fulfilled peaceful possession of the goods and found the seller liable to pay damages to the buyer and the financial institution
Besides, the next implied term is implied condition that the goods must correspond with the description. The Section 15 of SOGA 1957 provides that where there is a contract for the sale of goods by description, there is an implied condition that the goods must correspond with the description. Whether or not a sale is by description is a question of fact in each case. In the case of Varley v Whipp (1990), where a private individual who was selling a second-hand reaping machine said that it was new previous and had only cut 50 to 60 acres. On delivery, it proved to be much older and was in a bad condition. The court found for the buyer where the buyer could sue for the recovery of the price. This was a sale by description, and since the machine did not correspond to its description, the seller was in breach.
The following implied term is implied condition that goods must be reasonably fit for the purpose for which the buyer wants them. By Section 16 (1)(a) of SOGA 1957 states that where goods are sold in the course of a business and the buyer expressly or by implication makes known to the seller the purpose for which he is buying the goods, then there is an implied condition that the goods supplied will be reasonably fit for that purpose, even if it is a purpose for which such goods are not commonly bought. This section does not apply if the buyer does not rely, or if it is unreasonable for him to rely, on the seller's skill and judgment. Goods must be of merchantable quality. In the case of Griffiths v. Peter Conway Ltd in 1939, a woman bought a coat without implicating to the seller that she has sensitive skin. She subsequently contracted dermatitis from wearing the coat. Finally, she fails to claim damages after experience skin problems. The coat is fit...