Law Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Law - Assignment Example Winston cannot be defined as a consumer and therefore cannot rely on the rights awarded under the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations. An express term of a contract is that which is expressly agreed by the parties, either orally or in writing. As a general rule, the courts hold the written document as a complete agreement so that the terms inscribed within form the total extent of the contract and no further terms may be added or varied later by external evidence (Jacobs v. Batavia & General Plantations Trust Ltd. [1924] 1 Ch 287). However, since this instance is concerned with misrepresentation and terms which are implied into the contract (Hutton v. Warrren [1836] 1 M & W 466), the courts are seen to cater to parole evidence wherever necessary and the rule is likely to be excluded. In this instance, the express agreement necessarily includes the requirements mentioned in the standard form contract stipulating inter alia the description of the vehicle: â€Å"White Tra nsit XL, 48072 miles† as well as the exclusion clause mentioned. Moreover, it would also include the express oral representations that pertain to the description of the vehicle, â€Å"†¦ just the vehicle for you†¦ 48,000 miles on the clock, barely run in for a van like this †¦ and all the storage space you’re likely to need †¦Ã¢â‚¬ . ... v. SS Turid (Owners) [1992] 1 AC 397), or it may be implied by common law, where the term must not just be reasonable but also equitably just and â€Å"necessary to give business efficacy† to the contract (Lord Simon in BP Refinery (Westernport) Pty Ltd v. Shire of Hastings (1978) ALJR 20, 26). The terms implied by Statute of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 are more applicable to Winston’s situation. Application of Sale of Goods Act 1979 Sale by Description Where the goods are described before they are sold, there is an implied condition that they correspond to that description (s. 13). It is arguable what the description of the van actually completely comprises, as Daly never expressly agreed that the maximum load of the van in question is 1 ton, even though it was later discovered by the registration documents to be 0.5 tons. It is accepted that a â€Å"White Ford Transit XL† with 48000 miles falls part of the description, but the maximum load and capacity was never stipulated, even though Winston mentioned the specifications of the earlier van with which the new one had to be replaced; the earlier van fitted the requirements at 200 feet capacity and 1 ton load, the new van had 150 feet capacity with 0.5 tons maximum load, which fell short of requirements. Thus, if this falls part of the description, Winston may be allowed to reject the van on the basis of a breach of s.13. This is further supported by the fact that Daly had special knowledge in dealing with vans, and reliance was placed by Winston on his word (Harlingdon and Leinster v Christopher Hull Fine Art Ltd (1990)). For the purposes of a breach of description, it is irrelevant that Winston examined the van before purchasing (s. 13(13)). The description