Scribd
Upload
165 views2 pages

As To Acceptable Quality

The document discusses the legal standards for acceptable quality and fitness for a particular purpose under Malaysian consumer protection law. Goods are of acceptable quality if they are fit for their common purpose, acceptable in appearance and finish, free from minor defects, safe, and durable. The goods must also be regarded as acceptable by a reasonable consumer considering factors like nature, price, statements, and circumstances of supply. Case law has established that these standards apply to used goods as well. For fitness of a particular purpose, the consumer must make the purpose known, rely on the seller's skill and judgment to provide suitable goods, and the goods must fail to fulfill the disclosed purpose.

Uploaded by

Niqian Goi
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
165 views2 pages

As To Acceptable Quality

The document discusses the legal standards for acceptable quality and fitness for a particular purpose under Malaysian consumer protection law. Goods are of acceptable quality if they are fit for their common purpose, acceptable in appearance and finish, free from minor defects, safe, and durable. The goods must also be regarded as acceptable by a reasonable consumer considering factors like nature, price, statements, and circumstances of supply. Case law has established that these standards apply to used goods as well. For fitness of a particular purpose, the consumer must make the purpose known, rely on the seller's skill and judgment to provide suitable goods, and the goods must fail to fulfill the disclosed purpose.

Uploaded by

Niqian Goi
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

AS TO ACCEPTABLE QUALITY

 Section 32(a) CPA 1999 - Goods are deemed to be acceptable quality if they
are:
I. fit for all the purposes for which goods of the type in question are
commonly supplied.
II. acceptable in appearance and finish;
III. free from minor defects;
IV. safe;
V. durable;
 Section 32(b) stated that a reasonable consumer fully acquainted with the state
and condition of the goods, including any hidden defects, would regard the
goods as acceptable having regard to
I. the nature of the goods;
II. the price;
III. any statement made about the goods on any packaging or label on
the goods; any representation made about the goods by the supplier
or the manufacturer; and
IV. all other relevant circumstances of the supply of the goods.
 Henry Kendall & Sons v William Lillico & Sons Ltd
 Lord Reid suggested that, as the object of disclosure is to give the seller an
opportunity to exercise its skill and judgement in making or selecting goods,
the purpose must be stated with sufficient particularity.
 Puncak Niaga (M) Sdn Bhd V Nz Wheels Sdn Bhd
 The appellant had sued the respondent, for selling the car which was unfit for
its purpose and not of acceptable quality. The appellant contended the
respondent had breached the implied guarantees under the Consumer
Protection Act.
 In Matang Plastik & Metal Work Industries Sdn Bhd v Daimler Chrysler
Malaysia Sdn Bhd & Ors, the Court of Appeal held that the implied
guarantees in the CPA apply to a used car, thereby establishing that the CPA
applies to second-hand goods.
 Ty Auto Car Dealer Sdn Bhd v Tribunal Tuntutan Pengguna & Anor
 The Vehicle that bought by the respondent soon developed various problems
such as turbo failure, excessive noise from drivetrain and from axle, engine
problem, problems with the injector, the wiring and the computer of the said
Vehicle. The Respondent incurred expenditures on the repairs of the said
Vehicle. The Respondent therefore filed a claim against the Applicant before
the Tribunal for Consumer Claims
 Tribunal held that though the said Vehicle was a used car, Section 32(1) of
CPA nevertheless implied that it has to be of acceptable quality.

AS TO FITNESS FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE


 Section 33(1) CPA 1999 provided the implied guarantee as reasonably fit for
any particular purpose that the consumer makes known, expressly or by
implication, to the supplier as the purpose for which the goods are being
acquired
 Section 16 SOGA, Implied condition as to quality or fitness
 Union Alloy (M) Sdn Bhd v Sykt Pembenaan Yeoh Tiong Lay Sdn Bhd
 In this case, it provided four pre-conditions must be satisfied before Section
16(1)(a) of the Act could be applicable. He itemized the said four pre-
conditions as follows:
1. The buyer must make known to the seller the particular purpose for
which the goods are required;
2. It must be shown that there was reliance by the buyer on the seller's
skill and judgment, and the buyer must in fact rely on the seller to
supply suitable goods;
3. The goods must be of a description which it is in the course of the
seller's business to supply; and
4. If the goods are specific, they must not be sold under their patent or
trade name.
 Cammell Laired & Co Ltd v Manganese Bronze & Brass Co Ltd
 The contractor entered into a contract to manufacture a propeller for a vessel
in
 accordance with a number of specifications. The only element unspecified was
the thickness of the blades. The propellers were found to produce noise above
the level permitted for the vessel to receive the classification sought by the
owner.
 The court found that the contractor had breached the implied warranty that the
propeller would be fit for the intended purpose of obtaining the specified
classification, because the thickness of the blades had been left to the skill and
judgment of the contractor
 Grant v Australian Knitting Mills, Ltd
 Where Grant bought cellophane-packaged, woolen underwear from a shop that
specialised in selling goods of that description. After wearing the garments for
a short time he developed severe dermatitis because the garments contained
chemicals left over from processing the wool. The issue was whether there
was
 reliance on the retailer’s choice of a quality product such that there was a
breach of the implied condition of fitness for purpose.
 The court held that the goods were not reasonably fit for their only proper use.
The plaintiff relied on the retailer’s choice of a quality product that could be
worn without being washed first. As this was not the case, there was a breach
of the implied condition of fitness for purpose.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy