Professional Documents
Culture Documents
MNoonan2005
This presentation and Copyright therein is the property of Maureen Noonan and is prepared for the benefit of students enrolled in the Commercial Transactions course conducted by the Law Extension Committee and is available for their individual study. Any other use or reproduction, including reproduction by those students for sale without consent is prohibited.
MNoonan2005
MNoonan2005
e.g. Unfair Contracts Act (NSW), Consumer Credit Code (linked credit provider)
MNoonan2005
MNoonan2005
IDENTIFICATION OF NATURE OF TRANSACTION In order to apply the correct law, we must first know what we have. Is it a SALE?-of goods,services,intangibles Is it an agreement to sell in the future? A SUPPLY?-but, not a sale?e.g.lease, Hire Purchase Is it a LICENCE? Is it something else? GIFT, BARTER, BAILMENT,FRANCHISE,SECURITY?
MNoonan2005
SALE OF GOODS ESSO PETROLEUM CO. V. CUSTOMS & EXCISE COMMISSIONERS (1976) 1 SLR 1
1. 2. 3. 4. Esso promoted petrol With loyalty gift Coins with Soccer heroes Collect the full set of thirty coins. One coin given when you bury four gallons of fuel 5. Coins sold to public and tax on sales appropriate? Legal relationship. Sale of goods? COURT FOUND Coins not transferred for money consideration Consideration was the making of another contract To buy petrol No tax applicable
MNoonan2005
DEFINITIONS
We must acquaint ourselves with statutory definitions so that we can identify transactions within their scope. We must not assume that the ordinary meaning of a word is the same as the statutory definition. To illustrate, we will look at the following:
SALE SUPPLY
GOODS
CONSUMER SALE
SERVICES
CONSUMER
PRICE
MNoonan2005
MONEY CONSIDERATION
Must be money involved Even if that is only part of consideration Note purchase of car-part trade-in, part money See Loyalty giftEsso
MNoonan2005
SALE OF GOODS THE CONTRACT DEFINITIONS cont. Articles 1 and 2 of Vienna Convention
1. Convention applies to contracts of sale of goods between parties whose place of business are in different States. 2. Does not apply to sales: Of goods bought for personal, family or household use By auction On execution or otherwise by authority of law Of stocks, shares, investment securities, negotiable instruments or money Of ships, vessels, hovercraft or aircraft Of electricity
MNoonan2005
MNoonan2005
DEFINITIONS TRADE PRACTICES ACT S. 4 Goods Goods includes: a) ships, aircraft and other vehicles; b) animals, including fish; c) minerals, trees and crops, whether on, under or attached to land or not; and d) gas and electricity;
MNoonan2005
IS A COMPUTER SYSTEM "GOODS? TOBY CONSTRUCTIONS PRODUCTS PL V. COMPUTA BAR SALES PL Package consisting of 3 items hardware ($14,390)and 2 items of software (business management and Wordstar ($2,160)) Vendor agreed to install, train staff and provide post sale service. Plaintiff alleged breaches of conditions or warranties implied by SGA and TPA. Only applied if "goods". Work to be done and materials provided and perhaps transfer intellectual property? Rogers J: Sale of this computer system comprising both hardware and software constitutes a sale of goods with both SGA and TPA. Important to him that the total system was off the shelf; not individually crafted.
MNoonan2005
ASX operations P/L (ASXO) and Australian Stock Exchange Limited (ASX and Pont Data Australia P/L (1991)ATPR
Pont supplies electronically disseminated financial information to stockbrokers market analysts etc. ASXO supplies electronic. Proceedings concerned a contract between these two for the supply of information by ASXO to Pont by electronically coded signals and allegations of behaviour contrary to ss. 45, 46 and 49 of TPA requiring Pont to take certain data if it was to take other data. On issue that affected and was discussed in the case was whether the provision of information concerned was services or goods. If services, no contravention of s. 49 and appeal would succeed. If goods, it would be otherwise. Given the TPA definition of goods includes electricity, does electricity include these encoded electrical impulses? While the trial Judge thought so; on appeal, the court thought not.
MNoonan2005
MNoonan2005
PRICE
Consider the Following: At a price to be agreed by the parties in writing from time to time Price to abc=cost to xyz + percentage profit margin At valuation At a value to be fixed by a member of the Stock and Station Agents Association to be chosen by S, the seller I will take x million litres for y million dollars
MNoonan2005
PRICE Trawl Industries of Australia P/L v. Effem Foods P/L (T/A Uncle Bens of Australia)
UBA had pet food factory and wanted to launch a new product using Jack Mackeral. UBA entered into an agreement with TIA to buy Jack Mackeral under which TIA would incur the expense of acquiring and installing a processing line conditional on UBA purchasing Jack Mackeral for the period 1988-93 at a price which would provide a reasonable commercial profit to TIA. These base Prices shall apply for calendar year 1988. In the course of Nov 1988 and each subsequent Nov up to and including Nov 1992, TIA and UBA shall confer and establish applicable prices for the immediately following calendar year using the following formula: Price to UBA = Cost to TIA + percentage profit margin Void for uncertainty? No, capable of being worked out by court. The fact that evidence would be required and might be difficult not a bar. Incomplete? No, formula is sufficient.
MNoonan2005
In any proceedings arising out of a contract for a consumer sale, the onus of proving that the sale is not a consumer sale lies upon the party so contending.
MNoonan2005
consumer - goods-TPA 4B
Unless contrary intention appears: a person taken to have acquired goods as a consumer if: Test 1 price does not exceed prescribed amount ($40,000)
or
where price exceeded prescribed amount, goods were of a kind ordinarily acquire for personal, domestic or household use or consumption or the goods consisted of a commercial road vehicle AND Test 2 Goods not for re-supply, using them up or transforming them in trade or commerce in the course of a process of production, manufacture repairing or treating other goods or fixtures
MNoonan2005
consumer - services-TPA 4B
A person taken to have acquired services as consumer if: the price did not exceed prescribed amount OR where price exceeded prescribed amountthe services were of a kind ordinarily acquired for personal, domestic or household use or consumption
MNoonan2005
Aspects of Contract
We will go over some general matters before examining specific terms of contracts and product/service liability. They are: Express terms of contract Conditions and warranties Implied terms Interaction of statute with the common law
MNoonan2005
SALE OF GOODS DICK BENTLEY PRODUCTIONS V. HAROLD SMITH (MOTORS) (1965) 1 WLR 623
Dealer, Smith sold second hand Bentley to B. Smith told B car had travelled only 20,000 miles since replacement engine and gearbox. Speedometer showed 20,000 miles. Mileage more like 100,000. INNOCENT MISREPRESENTATION? (NO DAMAGES) OR WARRANTY? (DAMAGES) Question depends on conduct of parties, their words and behaviour rather than thoughts. Statement an inducement to act? Smith in a position to know, or at least to find out, history of car. Different to Mr. Williams in Oscar Chess in that respect. Not dishonest, no fraud. Statement as to 20,000 without foundation. Lord Denning found warranty in this case.
MNoonan2005
Was the clause in the contract a condition so that ANY breach entitled the buyer to reject the goods? No, this was what he called an Intermediate stipulation. No right to reject unless serious One is not entitled to reject something because it is not perfect. Citrus pellets were commonly bought for making cattle food. They were as fit for that as was reasonable; shown by eventual use. Some damaged, but not to such an extent to entitle rejection. Damage such as to entitle buyer to an allowance off price. Apply good commercial sense.
MNoonan2005
The relevance of Leason- interaction between law of contract (both express terms and as implied by the SOGA, TPA and FTA) and common law (the law of Equityremedies for innocent misrepresentation).The SOGA expressly preserves common law rules,but, should this be construed in a narrow sense to exclude equitable remedies?. In NSW, Leason was authority for wider interpretation. In equity, innocent representation does not give rise to damages; only rescission. Even then, if contract affirmed, may not be available. Contradictory authorities discussed in Leason, where it was decided rescission was available, despite delivery of horse. However,no affirmation after lack of correct breeding discovered. Debate continued. In 1988, NSW SOGA amended-s. 4(2A)- to make very clear that rules of equity relating to effect of misrepresentation apply to contracts for the sale of goods and permit rescission even where the misrepresentation has become term of contract and/or contract performed. The TPA (&FTA) have taken over now for many types of misleading / deceptive conduct. Also, TPA may provide damages for innocent misrepresentation; whereas equity does not. (damages available in Equity for fraudulent misrepresentation though).If next we turn to law of contract, we must look at express terms.including exclusion clauses to assess situation. If exclusion clause effective, then it may prevent remedy. Some of the implied terms and provisions of the SOGA can be modified in certain contracts and some cannot.See s. 16 (2) and (3) when condition may have to be treated as a warranty where buyer has accepted goods. In Leason, if this applied, returning the horse (breach of condition) may not have been an option and only damages would have been available (breach of warranty).The legislation and case law is not identical in the various Australian jurisdictions. For the purpose of our course, concentrate on NSW. For purposes of professional life; bear that in mind. MNoonan2005
LAW
Consumer sale? Formation of contract -breach Express terms SOGA, TPA implied -Div 2,2A TPA s. 52 misleading,deceptive Intnl sale? Vienna Convention Tort Financial Services? ASIC Act TPA VA manufacturer liability defective goods Unconscionable provisions 51AA, 51AB, 51AC TPA Contracts Review Act Consumer Credit Act Tort/s. 52 TPA Bailment?
REMEDIES
Action in contract Rescission/Damages Equitable TPA Orders IT general law Fines ACCC
Goods defective causing loss, injury Defendant taken advantage of serious inequality harsh agreement Untruthful representation Change in possession without transfer of title
Damages/TPA Damages
MNoonan2005
Atkin LJ 1. TOTAL FAILURE OF CONSIDERATION 2. IMPLIED CONDITION SELLER HAD RIGHT TO SELL 3. SELLER NO SUCH RIGHT 4. NO SALE AT ALL 5. NO OBLIGATION TO RETURN CAR TO SELLER SELLER NOT ENTITLED TO COMPLAIN ABOUT BENEFIT TO BUYER OF USE 6. MONEY HAD AND RECEIVED ON FAILURE OF CONSIDERATION
MNoonan2005
MNoonan2005
IMPLIED TERMS
- TITLE
S.69 TRADE PRACTICES ACT 1974 IN A CONTRACT OF SUPPLY OF GOODS BY A CORPORATION TO A CONSUMER OTHER THAN A S.69(3) CONTRACT THERE IS: AN IMPLIED CONDITION IN CONTRACT FOR SALE THAT SUPPLIER HAS A RIGHT TO SELL - AGREEMENT TO SELL WILL HAVE RIGHT TO SELL AT TIME PROPERTY IS TO PASS AN IMPLIED WARRANTY CONSUMER SHALL HAVE AND ENJOY QUIET POSSESSION - EXCEPT FROM PERSON ENTITLED TO BENEFIT CHARGE OR ENCUMBRANCE DISCLOSED OR KNOWN BEFORE CONTRACT MADE AN IMPLIED WARRANTY GOODS SHALL BE FREE FROM CHARGE OR ENCUMBRANCE - NOT DISCLOSED OR KNOWN BEFORE CONTRACT MADE
MNoonan2005
Miss P obtained a car on Hire Purchase from CAGA. She sold it to Dealer, Clinton Motors. After various transfers, TM bought it and sold to P in May 61. In August 61, Miss P obtained a loan from D&I purporting to give a Bill Of Sale over the car. She used the money to pay out the Hire Purchase agreement with CAGA On 09/08/61. Miss P did not repay D&I and they repossessed the car. P sued TM for Breach Of Warranty Of Title S. 17(1) SOGA In Sept 63. Breach Warranty rather than condition (Termination No Longer Possible). HAD ORIGINAL DEFECTIVE TITLE BEEN FED BY PAYING OUT HIRE PURCHASE CO? IF SO, ANY CAUSE OF ACTION UNDER S. 17(1) EXTINGUISHED.
COLLINS J.
IMPLIED TERMS
- DESCRIPTION
S.18 SALE OF GOODS ACT 1923 WHERE: THERE IS CONTRACT FOR SALE OF GOODS BY DESCRIPTION THERE IS: y AN IMPLIED CONDITION THAT GOODS WILL CORRESPOND WITH DESCRIPTION IF SALE BY SAMPLE + DESCRIPTION NOT SUFFICIENT FOR BULK TO CORRESPOND WITH SAMPLE IF THEY DO NOT ALSO CORRESPOND WITH DESCRIPTION
MNoonan2005
IMPLIED TERMS
- DESCRIPTION
S.70 TRADE PRACTICES ACT 1974 WHERE: THERE IS CONTRACT FOR SUPPLY OF GOODS (OTHERWISE THAN BY AUCTION) BY A CORPORATION IN COURSE OF BUSINESS TO A CONSUMER BY DESCRIPTION THERE IS: AN IMPLIED CONDITION THAT GOODS WILL CORRESPOND WITH DESCRIPTION IF SALE BY SAMPLE + DESCRIPTION, NOT SUFFICIENT FOR BULK TO CORRESPOND WITH SAMPLE IF THEY DO NOT ALSO CORRESPOND WITH DESCRIPTION. CAN STILL BE SALE BY DESCRIPTION EVEN IF ONLY EXPOSED FOR SALE OR HIRE AND SELECTED BY CONSUMER. S. 74(2).
MNoonan2005
MNoonan2005
MNoonan2005
IMPLIED TERMS
- QUALITY OR FITNESS
S.19 SALE OF GOODS ACT 1923 SUBJECT TO PROVISIONS OF ACT NO IMPLIED WARRANTY OR CONDITION AS TO QUALITY OR FITNESS EXCEPT WHERE: BUYER EXPRESSLY OR BY IMPLICATIONMAKES KNOWN PARTICULAR PURPOSE BUYER RELIES ON SELLERS SKILL AND JUDGEMENT AND GOODS ARE TYPE IT IS SELLERS BUSINESS TO SUPPLY THERE IS: AN IMPLIED CONDITION THAT GOODS ARE REASONABLY FIT FOR PURPOSE
MNoonan2005
IMPLIED TERMS
- QUALITY OR FITNESS
S.19 SALE OF GOODS ACT 1923 EXCEPT WHERE: GOODS BOUGHT BY DESCRIPTION and SELLER DEALS IN GOODS OF THAT DESCRIPTION THERE IS: AN IMPLIED CONDITION THAT GOODS SHALL BE OF MERCHANTABLE QUALITY EXCEPT WHERE BUYER HAS EXAMINED DEFECTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN REVEALED ON EXAMINATION y IMPLIED WARRANTY CAN ARISE BY USAGE OF TRADE y EXPRESS WARRANTY OR CONDITION y DOES NOT NEGATIVE IMPLIED WARRANTY OR CONDITION y UNLESS INCONSISTENT
MNoonan2005
IMPLIED TERMS
- QUALITY OR FITNESS
S.71 TRADE PRACTICES ACT 1974 Where: A corporation supplies goods to consumer (other than auction) in course of business buyer expressly or by implication makes known particular purpose There is: An implied condition that goods are reasonably fit for purpose Unless it is unreasonable for buyer to rely on sellers Skill and judgement There is: An implied condition that Goods are of merchantable quality Except defects specifically drawn to attention of Consumer or where consumer examines goods, and defects should have been revealed on that examination
MNoonan2005
IMPLIED TERMS
- FITNESS FOR PURPOSE
CASE
GRANT V. AUSTRALIAN KNITTING MILLS
PURPOSE
WORN NEXT TO SKIN
NOTE
AGAINST RETAILER, MANUFACTURER NEGLIGENT INSUFFICIENT TO MAKE KNOWN PARTICULAR PURPOSE
COAT TO BE WORN BY A PERSON WITH AN ABNORMALITY MOTOR CAR TO DRIVE ALONG THE ROAD REASONABLY FIT IF ROADWORTHY
MNoonan2005
IMPLIED TERMS
- FITNESS FOR PURPOSE
SE
RO T ER . S NNON MOTOR O.
PURPOSE
R TO DRI E LON T E RO D
NOTE
RO D ORT FOR RE SON LE TIME ONL FOUND OUT FTER RDS IMPLIED RR NT NO LON ER IL LE E USE OF NO LED E OF DEFE T ONTR T FOR PUR SE OF U TTI EFFE T OF TR DE N ME . DES RIPTION IN ONTR T
MNoonan2005
NE RIN POINT OF F ILURE LE ME D OUPLIN FIT FOR ( SIN STO E) . TO IN TR ILERS UP LE IS FITTED IT OR RIN TT MENTS LDR . RT T F ST M RS LL S FLE I LE, E SIL M N ED, OMFORT LE, SUIT LE FOR TOURIN R
Ashington Piggeries Ltd v Christopher Hill Ltd; Christopher Hill Ltd v Nirdsirdmel (1972) AC441; (1971) 1ALLER847
Ashington Piggeries (AP) had a mink farm. They used Christopher Hill (CH)to make a compound food to feed the mink. It was an oral contract. The formula for the compound which specified the ingredients was provided by AP, (an expert in the nutritional requirements of mink). CH was in the business of compounding food stuffs for domestic animals but knew nothing about mink and had never compounded food stuffs for minks before. CH entered into a commodity contract with Nirdsirdmel (N) for them to supply a herring meat of fair average quality of the season for the compound. The herring meal contained DNMA which had been produced by a chemical reaction because of sodium nitrate used as a preservative. The DNMA was toxic for the mink, which died.
MNoonan2005
Ashington Piggeries Ltd v Christoper Hill Ltd; Christopher Hill Ltd v Nirdsirdmel (description) cont.
CH, seller, sued AP, buyer, for price. AP, in cross action, sued CH - breach of contract alleging King Size did not correspond with description; not reasonably fit for purpose; and not of merchantable quality. In X action, CH joined N. CH admitted that sales of King Size were sales by description. Breach of implied condition that the goods supplied would correspond with description? The Court of Appeal had decided the goods complied with the description. HofL analysed: Did the presence of DNMA really affect quality or did it make a difference in kind? If the former, then in accordance with description. The contract said: Norwegian herring meal fair average quality of the season, expected to analyze not less than 70% protein, not more than 12 % fat and not more than 4% salt. HofL said: What was sold was Norwegian herring meal, despite the DNMA problem and it matched that description.
MNoonan2005
Ashington Piggeries Ltd v Christoper Hill Ltd; Christopher Hill Ltd v Nirdsirdmel (fit for purpose) AP had made known to CH the particular purpose for the King Size, but had CH made that purpose known to N? Did the buyers rely on sellers skill & judgement? They made known they were compounding it for foodstuffs and it was common food for mink; but they did not explicitly state that. The majority decision-purpose made known. In dissent, Lord Diplock -purpose not specific enough as it could have been any one of a range of purposes.
MNoonan2005
Rasell v. Garden City Vinyl and Carpet Centre Pty Ltd (1991) ATPR 41-152 Mr. and Mrs. Rasell ordered carpet for their home from a carpet manufacturer. They specified that the carpet was to be a particular colour to match the interior dcor of the house and the internal walls which were exposed brick. The carpet was supplied and there was no complaint as to its quality as carpet, but the colour of the carpet was different in patches and different from the colour specified. This was due to "pile reversal" or "watermarking"; a result of the manufacturing process. Did the customer have to accept the carpet? It was held that the carpet was not reasonably fit for the purpose of blending in with or matching the existing dcor; a particular purpose made known at the time of purchase. a breach of s. 71 (2) TPA. Further, since it was also not fit for one of the usual purposes for which carpet is purchased (matching existing dcor) it was not of merchantable quality. Note also that it was new, high quality and expensive carpet.
MNoonan2005
IMPLIED TERMS
- MERCHANTABLE QUALITY CASE
DAVID JONES V. WILLIS
QUALITY
NOTE
NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE OF WALKING EITHER
DESCRIPTION WALKING SHOES & RELIED ON SKILL AND JUDGMENT DESPITE NOT MANUFACTURERS BROWN AND SON DIFFERENT USE V. CRAIKS ASSUMPTIONS. CLOTH FOR UNDISCLOSED PURPOSE OF DRESSES V.INDUSTRIAL. DANIELS V. WHITE BOTTLE OF R AND TARBARD WHITES LEMONADE SALE BY DESCRIPTION
THROWAWAY PRICE AN INDICATION GOODS NOT MERCHANTABLE QUALITY NO RELIANCE ON SKILL AND JUDGMENT SO (2) ONLY
MNoonan2005
IMPLIED TERMS
- MERCHANTABLE QUALITY
CASE
WILSON V. RICKETT COCKERELL
QUALITY
A TON OF COALITE SHOULD NOT EXPLODE. QUITE CLEARLY CONSIGNMENT NOT MERCHANTABLE. RABBIT CARCASSES SHOULD NOT ARRIVE PUTREFIED. VEGETABLE GLUE SHOULD NOT BE DEFECTIVE. WERE THEY EXAMINED?
NOTE
ANOTHER EXAMPLE WHERE FITNESS FOR PURPOSE WOULD HAVE FAILED
BEER V. WALKER
A PERSON SELLING HUMAN FOOD WARRANTS FOOD IS GOOD ON ARRIVAL. SAW BARRELS, DID NOT EXAMINE BECAUSE OF TIME. DEFECT WOULD HAVE BEEN IMMEDIATELY APPARENT.
MNoonan2005
W.M.Johnson P/L v. Maxwelton (Oaklands) P/L CASCNSW CA 40136/99 23/10/2000 Maxwelton farmed Tara, running cattle, sheep and fat lambs and growing cereal. Dixon (Manager) decided to acquire a hay baler. Hay is mown and raked into windrows. Then it is picked up by the baler, compressed into bales, and tied with twinelast is knotting system. He bought a used Heston 4800 baler "as is" for $35,000. Saw 3 faults. Seller reduced price by $1,000.Seller indicated that the baler was a good and reliable baler and had been in operational use in the previous season. Dixon picked it up, cleaned off chaff, changed the oil in the gear boxes greased the machine, adjusted the chains according to the operators manual, replaced a bolt and went to a baling school. Knotting system did not function. After attempts at repairs, abandoned use of it. s. 71(1) TPA "merchantability" Consumer for purposes of ActBaler supplied in the course of a business. Not possible to see problem when not operating and so inspection could not reveal. s. 66(2) goods are of merchantable quality if they are as fit for the purpose for which goods of that kind are commonly bought as it is reasonable to expect having regard to any description applied to them, the price and all the other relevant circumstances. Calculation of price did not reflect a known inoperable essential component""as Is" could not of itself exclude implied condition still less "as per inspection"in this case only covered the defects leading to the $1,000 reduction.
MNoonan2005
TRADE PRACTICES ACT 1974 - SECT 74 Warranties in relation to the supply of services
(1) In every contract for the supply by a corporation in the course of a business of
services to a consumer there is an implied warranty that the services will be rendered with due care and skill and that any materials supplied in connection with those services will be reasonably fit for the purpose for which they are supplied. (2) Where a corporation supplies services (other than services of a professional nature provided by a qualified architect or engineer) to a consumer in the course of a business and the consumer, expressly or by implication, makes known to the corporation any particular purpose for which the services are required or the result that he or she desires the services to achieve, there is an implied warranty that the services supplied under the contract for the supply of the services and any materials supplied in connection with those services will be reasonably fit for that purpose or are of such a nature and quality that they might reasonably be expected to achieve that result, except where the circumstances show that the consumer does not rely, or that it is unreasonable for him or her to rely, on the corporation's skill or judgment. (3) A reference in this section to services does not include a reference to services that are, or are to be, provided, granted or conferred under: (a) a contract for or in relation to the transportation or storage of goods for the purposes of a business, trade, profession or occupation carried on or engaged in by the person for whom the goods are transported or stored; or (b) a contract of insurance.
MNoonan2005
Problems with Services - SMH 06/03/03 Big Pond Ripples with Angry Users by Sue Lowe
Telstra has spent almost $2m compensating customers of its Internet cable service after widespread collapses in January and February.Telstra yesterday acknowledged repeated breakdowns of its high-speed cable network and offered customers a regate of 25% on their typical $60 to $90 monthly bills. Telstras internet arm, Big Pond, is estimated to have between 70,000 and 80,000 cable internet customers.. After a threatened class action lawsuit by customers of its broadband internet network ADSL in 2001 Telstra introduced a service guarantee for ADSL but it was not extended to the cable network. Under the ADSL guarantee customers are given a 10% rebate for every 7 hours and 24 minutes their service is unavailable.
MNoonan2005
Incoterms 2000
A collection of essential trade terms compiled by the International Chamber of Commerce. If used in a contract, they have a uniform interpretation. There are 13 terms. In CT, knowledge of 3 only is required. EXW-ex works, FOB-free on board and CIFcost, insurance, freight.
MNoonan2005
D terms-seller is responsible for delivery and so may be liable for breach of contract if goods lost or damaged on the way
Sellers factory
Sellers port
Buyers port
MNoonan2005
EXW-Ex Works
Goods are delivered at the sellers premisesusually, factory, warehouse or place of business. Risk passes when goods are placed at buyers disposal as agreed. Seller must give adequate notice for delivery and mark and package goods appropriately at their own expense in conformity with the contract
MNoonan2005
FOB-Free on Board
One of the most common terms used. The seller is free from responsibilities and risks once goods have passed over the rail of a named ship at a named port. Note that with container ships, sometimes containers do not pass rail, and so another term (FCA-free carrier) may be more appropriate. Lower than CIF price because price does not include insurance or freight.
MNoonan2005
CIF-Cost,insurance,freight
Seller is responsible for costs, insurance and freight for transporting goods to agreed destination, but risks and additional costs incurred after goods have passed ships rail are borne by buyer. Seller must provide goods and documents, obtain export licence and complete formalities, make transport contract and arrangements, and insurance.
MNoonan2005
John is a farmer and he needs to place a 1,000kg piece of equipment in his barn. The equipment must be lifted thirty feet into a hayloft. He goes to Mitre 10 hardware and tells them that he needs some heavy-duty rope to use on his farm. They recommend a 2cm thick nylon rope and John purchases 100 m of it. John ties the rope around the piece of equipment, puts it through a pulley, and with the aid of a tractor lifts the equipment off the ground. Suddenly the rope breaks. In the crash to the ground, the equipment is severely damaged. John wants to take action against Mitre 10 because the rope was not fit to do the job. Advise him.
MNoonan2005