Repairs, refusals and rejections

Daniel Carr

doi:10.1017/S0008197307000827

Repairs, refusals and rejections

Daniel Carr

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Considers the House of Lords judgment in J&H Ritchie Ltd v Lloyd Ltd on whether the claimant had been entitled under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 s.35(6) to reject agricultural equipment that had been repaired at his request on the ground that the seller had refused to tell him the cause of the fault. Discusses whether the defendant owed such a duty to disclose, and whether it subsisted after the fault had been repaired.© 2011 Sweet & Maxwell

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	498-500
Number of pages	3
Journal	Cambridge Law Journal
Volume	66
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197307000827
Publication status	Published - Nov 2007

Keywords

Buyers' powers and duties
Defective goods
Rejection
Repairs
Sale of goods

Access to Document

10.1017/S0008197307000827

Cite this

@article{5e62e4b7e38841e1a6ad925c941cd025,

title = "Repairs, refusals and rejections",

abstract = "Considers the House of Lords judgment in J&H Ritchie Ltd v Lloyd Ltd on whether the claimant had been entitled under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 s.35(6) to reject agricultural equipment that had been repaired at his request on the ground that the seller had refused to tell him the cause of the fault. Discusses whether the defendant owed such a duty to disclose, and whether it subsisted after the fault had been repaired.{\textcopyright} 2011 Sweet & Maxwell",

keywords = "Buyers' powers and duties, Defective goods, Rejection, Repairs, Sale of goods",

author = "Daniel Carr",

note = " dc.publisher: Cambridge University Press Case comment ",

year = "2007",

month = nov,

doi = "10.1017/S0008197307000827",

language = "English",

volume = "66",

pages = "498--500",

journal = "Cambridge Law Journal",

issn = "0008-1973",

publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Repairs, refusals and rejections

AU - Carr, Daniel

N1 - dc.publisher: Cambridge University Press Case comment

PY - 2007/11

Y1 - 2007/11

N2 - Considers the House of Lords judgment in J&H Ritchie Ltd v Lloyd Ltd on whether the claimant had been entitled under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 s.35(6) to reject agricultural equipment that had been repaired at his request on the ground that the seller had refused to tell him the cause of the fault. Discusses whether the defendant owed such a duty to disclose, and whether it subsisted after the fault had been repaired.© 2011 Sweet & Maxwell

AB - Considers the House of Lords judgment in J&H Ritchie Ltd v Lloyd Ltd on whether the claimant had been entitled under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 s.35(6) to reject agricultural equipment that had been repaired at his request on the ground that the seller had refused to tell him the cause of the fault. Discusses whether the defendant owed such a duty to disclose, and whether it subsisted after the fault had been repaired.© 2011 Sweet & Maxwell

KW - Buyers' powers and duties

KW - Defective goods

KW - Rejection

KW - Repairs

KW - Sale of goods

U2 - 10.1017/S0008197307000827

DO - 10.1017/S0008197307000827

M3 - Article

SN - 0008-1973

VL - 66

SP - 498

EP - 500

JO - Cambridge Law Journal

JF - Cambridge Law Journal

IS - 3

ER -

Repairs, refusals and rejections

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this