Unit 7 Business Law of Contract Assignment

Unit 7 Business Law of Contract Assignment


The Unit 7 Business Law of Contract Assignment clarifies concepts such as agency law, monopoly and anti-competitive actions, intellectual property law, sales of products and sales of goods and provision of services, and so on. As a result, these rules were applied to numerous scenarios in the assignment in order to better comprehend their idea and comprehension.

The Unit 7 Business Legislation of Contract Assignment is broken into four assignments, each of which focuses on a different type of law in the United Kingdom. To authenticate the matter, the assignment is backed up by references and sources. At the end of the assignment, you’ll find a reference list.

Task 1

Be able to apply the main principles affecting the legal relationship between business organizations and their consumers

P1.1 Analyze and recommend Mr. Adam discusses the legal standards governing implied conditions in the sale of products and the provision of services.

A contract, in the United Kingdom’s contract law, is a legally binding arrangement. A legitimate contract has a number of terms and conditions to which both parties must adhere. The terms can be categorised as either inferred or express terms. Express terms are those that are employed explicitly and directly by the parties, whereas implied terms are those that are included in the contract by custom, usage, law, or other means. In Esso Petroleum v Mardon, the extent of explicit and implied ternms is examined (1976). (2015) (Worksmart) (Worksmart) (Worksmart) (Worksmar

The words are also divided into groups based on their significance. Conditions are the terms that are highly significant and market necessary in a contract, and they are analysed in Poussard v Spiers and Pond (1876). However, warranties are the words that are comparatively less important, and they are analysed in Bettini v Gye (1876). (1876). The contract terminates if a condition is broken, but if a warranty is broken, the remedy is damages, and the contract survives. (2012, Event Justice)

The present work involves the sale of commodities and the provision of services, and there are two forms of legislation that deal with this.

The Supply of Goods and Services Act (1982) is referred to as SGA SGS. The Sale of Goods Act (1979) is referred to as SGA.

Section 12(2) of the SGA defines an implied guarantee. The seller’s warranty, which is held in Niblett v Confectioners’ Material, states that the items shall be free of any flaws (1921). Section 13 requires that the items match the seller’s description of the goods, which is an implicit criterion established in Arcos v Ranaason (1933). In Stevenson v Rogers, it was found that if the items supplied are not adequate in terms of quality, the buyer has the right to terminate the contract under Section 14 (2). (1999).

As the items are delivered simultaneously with the services, the current duty also requires the use of SGS. If the items are sold with an allied service, the services must be delivered with reasonable care and skill, according to Section 13 of the SGS. The services must be given in a fair amount of time, according to Section 14. (http://www.elawresourceuk.co.uk/elawresourceuk/elawresource . The party may restrict or exclude responsibility by introducing an exclusion provision, but the exclusion clause must be brought to the attention of the opposing party in order to profit from it. However, under section 6 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, exclusion clauses are not permitted in consumer contracts and are hence illegal. (Ashurst,)

Now, based on the circumstances of the situation, Mr. Adam decided to buy a television. purchased from a retailer One television was mentioned by Miss Bianca, the manager. It’s described as ‘very excellent quality, long-lasting, and exceptional value for money,’ and it’s even highlighted on TV. Mr. Adam paid for the television and completed the necessary paperwork.

Mr Adam’s TV, on the other hand, does not meet any of the conditions. The TV would be supplied to him in the following three working days and installed by the store engineers, resulting in a clear breach of sections 12(2), 14(2), and 14(3) of the SGA.Further, the TV would be delivered to him in the next three working days and was installed by the store engineers. After three weeks, though, there was a flare and plumes of smoke emerged from it.

As a result, sections 13 and 14 of the SGS have been broken since inadequate after-sale services have been supplied. When Adam phoned the Departmental store, they denied any responsibility. They also rely on a clause in the contract that exempts them from obligation for items that fail after they have been delivered and installed. However, the aforesaid exclusion provision is unlawful under section 6 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977. As a result, Adam will be entitled to sue the business for his loss.

P1.2 Examine and advise Mr. Adam on the legal laws governing property transfer and possession.

Ownership of unascertained items goes when they are ascertained under section 16 (Kursell v Timber Operators & Contractors Ltd) (1927). When the goods are ascertained, ownership of the items passes as suggested between the contracting parties under section 17. When the commodities have been determined but the parties’ intentions are unclear, the rules of section 18 take precedence. (L. Merritt, 2015)

Dennant v Skinner found that in the case of an unconditional contract, the goods pass immediately under 18(1). (1948).

However, if there is a stipulation or condition, the goods pass only if the requirement is met under section 18. (2). (See Nanka Bruce v Commonwealth Trust Ltd (1926) for an example.)

According to 18 (3) and (4), if the buyer must do the measurement, approval, or weight as a condition for the specified items, ownership will pass once the same is completed (Weiner v Harris) (1910).

If unascertained goods are totally appropriated, ownership goes to the purchaser of the items under section 18 (5).

P1.3 assess the legal requirements governing buyer and seller remedies in sales of goods contracts.

The Seller has numerous remedies, the first of which is to halt the goods while they are in transit, as per sections 44, 45, and 46 of the SGA. However, in order to exercise this right, the buyer must be insolvent; second, under sections 47 and 48 of the SGA, the buyer has the right to resell the goods. However, the items must be perishable or there must be a contract provision to exercise this privilege; Third, the seller can sue for damages under Section 50 of the SGA if the buyer refuses to accept the products; fourth, the seller has a lien under Sections 41, 42, and 43 of the SGA; and fifth, the seller can sue for the price of the goods under Section 49 of the SGA.

Buyer’s Various Remedies Include: First, the buyer can sue for damages under Section 51 of the SGA if the goods are not delivered; second, the buyer can reject the goods if they are not in compliance with the implied terms of the SGA; and third, the buyer can reject the goods if they are not in compliance with the implied terms of the SGA. Finally, under Section 48B of the SGA, the buyer can have the items rectified or replaced. Fourth, in the event of a breach of guarantee, the buyer is entitled to damages under Section 53 of the SGA. Fifth, as per section 35A SGA, the buyer can accept the items that are suitable and reject the goods that are not in conformity with the requirements. Sixth, the buyer can obtain specific performance under section 52 of the SGA.

P1.4 Use statutory product responsibility measures for defective items.

A person is found negligent under the law of negligence when the duty of care imposed on the wrongdoer is breached and the breach causes damage to the innocent. The well-known case of Donoghue v Stevenson influenced the law significantly (1932).

The notion of strict responsibility is related with the violation of duty of care in negligence law, but under the Consumer Protection Act 1987, product liability applies in the case of faulty products provided. The individuals who supply faulty items are the supplier, importer, marker, and producer, as defined in section 2.


This Unit 7 Business Law of Contract Assignment understands the relevant laws that are thus related to every business, and these laws have been applied to various given situations in order to make them more clear and understand them in the context of daily business and routine life of every individual.

The laws are both national and international, but they are fully enforced in the United Kingdom. As a result, it is proposed that all legal components of the assignment be clearly grasped in order to implement them realistically and authentically.


Arcos v Ranaason (1933).

Ashurst (2009) Limitation and Exclusion of Liability

Bettini v Gye (1876)