A commissioning and training obligation in a contract for the sale of goods, where the principal object is the sale itself, is likely to be classified as a warranty rather than a condition, breach of which sounds only in damages and does not justify termination. A buyer who retains goods and requires the seller to carry out remedial works at the seller's cost, without intimating rejection, will be deemed to have accepted the goods under s 35 of the Sale of Goods Act after the lapse of a reasonable time, thereby losing the right to reject. The estoppel-based exception (where the seller induces the buyer to retain goods pending repairs) will not apply where the buyer positively requires remedial works going beyond what is necessary to make the goods conform to the contract.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 10 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 10 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.