header-logo header-logo

17 March 2007
Issue: 7264 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

SALE OF GOODS—DELIVERY—IMPLIED CONDITION

J & H Ritchie Ltd v Lloyd Ltd [2007] UKHL 9, [2007] All ER (D) 109 (Mar)

House of Lords
Lord Hope, Lord Scott, Lord Rodger, Lord Brown and Lord Mance
7 March 2007

Where parties have entered into a contract for the purchase of goods which develop a fault and are taken away for inspection and repair by the sellers, the sellers may be under an implied condition under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (SGA 1979) to provide the buyers with information requested about the repairs, to enable the buyers to make a properly informed choice between accepting and rejecting the goods.

Charles Graham QC and Gillian Wade (instructed by McCartney Stewart, Renfrew) for the appellants
Colin Tyre QC and Pino Di Emidio (instructed by Balfour & Mason, Edinburgh) for the respondents.
The appellant company carried on a farming business. The respondent was a supplier of agricultural machinery based in Scotland. The appellant purchased as a single item a combination seed drill and power harrow (the harrow) from the respondent. A fault developed with

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll