header-logo header-logo

17 May 2007
Issue: 7273 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Horses for courses

The right to reject: did the Law Lords miss a trick? ask Stephen Sly and Paul Clarke

It is a strange fact that modern commerce in Britain owes more to the farmyard than is commonly supposed. Commercial dealings between businesses are still regulated largely by principles drawn up in the 19th century, when disputes tended to centre on the quality and suitability of horses, cattle or produce.

The Sale of Goods Act 1979 (SGA 1979), successor to the Sale of Goods Act 1893, remains the main source of rules on commercial transactions. Since the rules it embodies have existed for so long, interpretation is generally straightforward. But still, novel issues crop up and occasionally the courts have to give guidance.

One issue which has never been resolved to everybody's satisfaction is that of rejection of goods. Now the House of Lords has tried—and arguably failed—to clarify the rules.

THE RIGHT TO REJECT

SGA 1979 implies certain conditions into contracts of sale, breach of which gives the buyer a right to reject the goods supplied and terminate

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll