Wednesday, February 26, 2020

UCTA Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

UCTA - Case Study Example The delivered car was found to be seriously defective and it evidently required repairs that would cost around a 1000. The practice prevailing in Thomas Co was that it always offered its customers the opportunity to purchase a two years service contract covering parts and labour on cars purchased from them. Smith Co had always declined such offers from Thomas Co. The remedies available to the Smith Co, under the statute, are discussed hereunder. A contract is an agreement giving rise to obligations which are enforced or recognised by law. The factor which distinguishes contractual from other legal rights is that they are based on the agreement of the contracting parties. It is important to bear in mind that every breach of a contract allows the plaintiff a remedy at law. The Sale of Goods Act states that consumers have been defined as people purchasing for purposes unrelated to their trade, business or profession. Section 12(1) of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, defines a consumer and this has three elements, the party dealing as a consumer must neither make the contract in the course of business nor hold himself out as doing so; the other party must make the contract in the course of business and finally, if the contract involves the transfer of goods, then they must be of a type ordinarily supplied for private use or consumption. The burden of proving that a ... Several similar purchases had been made before. The contract excluded liability for breach of certain statutory implied terms and the exclusion clause was subject to section 6 of the UCTA. The Court of Appeal held that the purchase of the car was only incidental to the company's business activity, which meant that the purchase was not made in the course of business and so the plaintiff company was dealing as a consumer. Thus the defendant could not exclude liability for the breach of implied terms1. Similarly, in our case the car was purchased for both private and business use. Hence, the status of the claimant can be considered as that of a consumer according to this act and the judgment in the above case. In Stevenson v Rogers the Court of Appeal held that a sale to a person who had no business connection to the seller would be considered a consumer2. Hence, in our case Smith Co can be considered as a consumer, since they had purchased the car for the private and business purposes of its director, this is in conformity with the broader view taken by the Appellate Court in respect of the term consumer in the case Stevenson v Rogers. Section 3 of the UCTA covers a number of different types of exclusions or restrictions in respect of liability and makes them all subject to the test of reasonableness. These tests are of four types and apply to the different types of exclusions. These are, first, in relation to a contract term the clause should have been fair and reasonable to have been included, having regard to the circumstances, and which could reasonably be expected to have been known to the parties. Second, contracts in relation to goods (section 6 and 7 UCTA) and section 11(2) and schedule 2 of the UCTA have specified five matters

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.