Legal Research Essay Example

Legal Research Essay Simon, a first year law student, decided to buy a DVD for use at university. He wanted a machine that would play his own DVDs as he had a collection of films he had copied from video to DVD at home. He explained exactly what he wanted at the shop. However, when he got the machine home he found it would not play home-recorded material, but it did play the pre-recorded DVDs he had bought. He went back to the shop but they said they did not have the machine he wanted at that he could not have his money back as the DVD player they sold him was in perfect working order. Simon, deciding he needed a break booked a holiday, looking for: Sun, sand and Sangria. He told the holiday agents exactly what he wanted; lots of people, a full night life, luxury accomodation and the beach. He was assured that Hotel Luxor in Macedonia in July would be perfect to meet his needs. He took the holiday, paying by credit card. On his arrival, he found himself booked into a small chalet in the mountains, where it snowed. There was no room service,lights out at 10.00 pm and the only other guest at the chalet was a surly sheep. Thoroughly dissapointed, Simon returned to Liverpool to resume his law studies. However, he had not paid his full fees from the previous year and was not allowed to enrol on the degree. Advise Simon of his legal remedies in all the above circumstances. We will write a custom essay sample on Legal Research specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Legal Research specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Legal Research specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer With view of the Sales of Goods Act 1979, Simon has a case for compensation in regards to a breach of conduct. In addition, Simon needs to look at Loss of Enjoyment, and Inconvinience, in regards to a falsely represented holiday abroad. Finally, the last paragraph deals with basic contract law, and the failure of paying for tuition fees. Section 2(1) of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 defines a contract of sales of goods as a contract by which the seller transfers or agrees to transfer the property in goods to the buyer for a money consideration, called the price. Section 13(1) of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 states that where there is a contract for the sale of goods by description, there is an implied term that the goods correspond with the discription. Section 14 deals with the implied terms about quality or fitness. Ss(3) states that where the seller sells goods in the course of a business and the buyer, expressly, or by implication, makes known to the seller (a) any particular purpose for which the goods are being bought, there is an implied term that the goods supplied under the contract are reasonably fit for that purpose Simon explained exactly what he wanted at the shop and thus the particular purpose as to why the good was being purchased, however the DVD machine that he purcahsed did not correspond with the description, and therefore did not satisfy the purpose for the purchase. An important remedy available to Simon is the rejection of the goods for breach of contract. Simon does not need to return the goods to the selller to reject the goods, as it is enough if he informs the seller that he refuses to accept them [Grimoldby v Wells] [1875]1. If there is any breach of condition within the time limited for performance the seller makes a conforming tender, then this may be effective. [Borrowman, Phillips Co v Free and Hollis] [1878]2. Simon may look to a compensatory damages for breach of conduct in regards to the DVD player. The aim of compensation is to put the claimant into as good a position as would have been if no breach of conduct had been committed. [Robinson v Harman] (1848)3 In 1994 a Bill was implemented and has now passed into law as the Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994. The main change effecting this are to modify the quality warranties, and ammend the rules on acceptance and rejection. The three main terms laid down in the act are present in s13, s14(2), and s14(3), and the main objective of them is to give buyers some protection against the risk of the goods proving to have defects of quality or fitness for purpose. There is implied term that where goods are sold by description the goods must correspond with their description, however the protection here can be limited, particularly where the description of goods is not a detailed one. 4Distinction between s14(2) and s14(3) had been been muddled because such a wide interprentation has been given to s14(3) that it covers ordinary purpose as well as special purposes, leading to significant overlapping. Therefore Section 14(6) was implemented in order to distinguish between the two sections [Jones v Bright][1829]5 Section 14(6) provides the test of fitness for purpose. This provided the statutory definition of merchatable quality. Its main element requires that the goods should be reasonably fit for the purpose for which goods of that kind were commonly bought [Aswan Engineering Establishment Co v Lupdine Ltd] [1987]6 1 7Under the original section 14(1) the buyer has to satisfy the court that he had expressly or by implication made known to the seller the particular purpose for which the goods were required so as to show that he relied on the sellers skill or judgement The current s14(3) now mainly confirms the old case law on this point. It is now clear that the onus is on the buyer in the first place is to only show that he has made known the purpose for which the goods are being bought. Reliance will then be presumed, unless the seller can show it to have been unreasonable. [Grant v Austrailian Knitting Mills][1936]8 In Simons case, it states that he explained exactly what he wanted , and so it is assumed that the seller understood precisely what Simon required. The seller could argue that Simon was unreasonably reliant on him to find him the right good. [Dorset Yacht Company Ltd v Home Office], [1970]9. In contrast, if the defendants can show that the breach is so slight that it would be unreasonable for the buyer to reject the goods, then the breach will be just warranty.10 Damages may be awarded for injury to the victims inconvenience or loss of enjoyment where the inconvenience or loss would have been presumed to have been contemplated by the parties at the time of entering the contract [British Columbia Saw-Mill Co Ltd v Nettleship] [1868]11 12In contracts to provide entertainment and enjoyment, (such as holidays), damages may be awarded for loss of enjoyment and the frustration, annoyance and disappointment associated with such loss [Jarvis v Swans Tour] [1973]13 Since this decision in Jarvis v Swans Tour [1973], the courts have awarded damages for loss of enjoyment and the reduced value of the holiday purchased. A charge for reduced value of the holiday purchased (diminution in value) is where a service which has been contracted for, but has not been provided, or where there has been some other breach of the contract between the supplier of the holiday or service and the holidaymaker. If this is the case the claimant claims the difference between what he purchased and what he received Loss of enjoyment is the 14distress, vexation, disappointment and annoyance suffered by a claimant on holiday, and they were unable to enjoy their holiday because of factors for which the defendant is liable. Simon may be entitled to damages for disappointment and loss of enjoyment suffered as a result of the breach of contract. This recognises the objective of a holiday contract, to provide enjoyment, peace of mind and relaxation. To work out how much damges Simon would be awarded the judge would try to find the difference in value between what the holidaymaker contracted to receive and what was actually received. So for Simon it would be the difference between Sun, sand, and sangria, lots of people, full night life, luxury accommodation, and a beach and in contrast small chalet in the mountains, snow, no room service, lights out at 10pm, and no other guests. If Simon is to receive damages, the ammount awarded is dependant on a number of components. The main components consist of the length of the holiday, and the price of it. In addition, the importance of the holiday is a main factor. Simon could argue that the holiday was extremely important to him, as earlier on in the case it says he is in need of a break after the stress caused to him with the DVD player he purchased. If Simon can argue this case succesfully then the courts may look at his case in a favourable maner. It is likely Simon could claim a complete refund, if he can argue that the contract came to nothing and he got not one thing for which he had been contracted. Simon could argue that the holiday was inordinately bad [Forsdyke v Panorama Holiday Group Ltd][2002]15 as what he received was almost the opposite of what the contract he agreed, and therefore claim back between two and two and a half times the cost of the holiday, as suggested by District Judge Geoffery Martin. The University has made an offer to Simon of a place on the course. An offer is a proposal or proposition by one party, who is willing to be bound by the terms of the proposal if accepted by another party. An acceptance must be full and complete, and by Simon enroling on the course, he subsequently accepted in full the offer. 16Universities reserve the right to impose sanctions against students who refuse to pay fees, and may result in the suspension of the students registration. As Simon has failed to pay the University , he is unable to register for the next year of the course. However he may be allowed to be reinstated on the course if he clears the debt or some sort of a repayment schedule is agreed. In conclusion, Simon may look to receive compensation for the DVD player, as long as he takes the old one back in the same condition it was in when purchased. Furthermore, Simon may also look to be awarded in damages for loss of enjoyment, and inconvinience regarding the holiday to Macedonia, as it was not the holiday type he had described to the seller that he wanted. Finally, Simon may be able to get his place back on the unervisity course if he can pay the debt he owes to the university, subsequently if he can not afford to, then he can arrange a repayment schedule.