Principles of Law Essay

QUESTIONMalik runs a restaurant at Taman Desa Kluang, Johor. He ordered from Ah Chong Mini Market 50 bags of Pakistani basmati rice at RM40 per bag and 200 packets of sugar at RM2.20 per packet. It was expressly agreed amongst the parties that Ah Chong must pack the sugar in boxes containing 20 packets from each one. However, when Ah Chong delivered the goods to Maliks restaurant, it was piece that the sugar was packed in boxes containing 30 packets each. The basmati rice that was supplied was found to be from India non Pakistan. Malik wishes to reject the goods. Advise Malik.ProblematicIssueWhether Malik evoke prevail legal action against Ah Chong for hurt of implied condition by exposition.Principles of Law sectionalization 2 of SGAEvery kind of movable property other than actionable claims and money, and includes stocks and shares, growing crops, grass and thing attached to or forming part of prop up which are agreed to be severed for sale or at a lower place the contra ct of sale segmentation 15 of SGAIf the contract is for the sales of goods by description, there is an implied condition that the goods must correspond with the description.Case Moore & Co v LaunderFacts Contract for 3,100 encases of canned fruit packed 30 tins to a case. But half of the cases contained only 24 tins although the total quantity was met. Held the goods non correspond with contractual description.The buyers entitled to reject the goods.Case Nagurdas Purshotumdas v Mitsui Bussan Kaisha preceding(prenominal) contract- sale of flour which had been sold in bags bearing a well-known trade mark. Subsequent contract- flour ordered the same as our anterior contract. Seller supplied flour of the same quality only if did not bear the same well-known trade mark. Held there was a breach of condition as the goods did not correspond with the description.ApplicationAccording to percentage 2 of SGA, basmati rice and sugar are movable property. According to air division 15 of SGA , the basmati rice and sugar supplied by Ah Chong must correspond with the description stated by Malik. According to the case of Moore & Co v Launder, Malik ordered from Ah Chong to delivered 200 packets of sugar and pack the sugar in boxes containing 20 packets each but Ah Chong pack the sugar in boxes containing 30 packets each. According to the case of Nagurdas Purshotumdas v Mitsui Bussan Kaisha, Malik ordered Ah Chong to delivered basmati rice from Pakistan but Ah Chong supplied basmati rice from India not Pakistan. resultantMalik ordered from Ah Chong to delivered 200 packets of sugar and pack the sugar in boxes containing 20 packets each but Ah Chong pack the sugar in boxes containing 30 packets each. Malik in addition ordered Ah Chong to delivered basmati rice from Pakistan but Ah Chong supplied basmati rice from India not Pakistan.Therefore, Malik can care legal action against Ah Chong for breach of implied condition by description. Malik also can repudiate the contract o r reject the goods.QUESTIONDiscuss the differences betwixt conditions and warranties in a contract of sale of goods.CONDITIONSSection 12(2) of SGA-Definition of look into direct is a stipulation essential to the main finding of the contract.Breach of ConditionContract can be repudiated, goods can be rejected.Exceptions (Situations where the innocent caller cannot repudiate the contract) Section 13 of SGA Where the buyers waives the condition. Where the buyers elects to treat the breach of condition as a breach of warranty. Where the contract is NOT severable and the buyer has legitimate the goods. Where the contract is specific goods the property in goods or ownership has passed to the buyer.WARRANTIESSection 12(3) of SGA-Definition of WarrantyWarranty is a stipulation collateral to the main purpose of the contract.Breach of WarrantyCan only claim damages but cannot reject goods or repudiate the contract.