High Court Gives Wide Protection To 'Satisfactory Quality' And 'Fitness For Purpose' Provisions Of Sale Of Goods Laws - Webster v JG Pears, And Omega Proteins, And Northern Counties Meat, High Court..

This case concerned the contract for Omega's sale of animal

by-products to Pears. Pears claimed that the products had to be of

category 3 standard rather than category 1 standard and Omega had

breached the contract by supplying only to the category 1 standard.

The High Court agreed with Pears. There was a breach of an express

term of the contract.

Although the High Court could have stopped there, it went on to

examine other arguments made by Pears in the alternative. Under

sale of goods legislation, there were implied terms that the goods

had to be of satisfactory quality and fit for any particular

purpose known to Omega. Again, the High Court agreed with Pears on

these issues. The Court explained that when determining whether

goods were of satisfactory quality, you must look at what a

reasonable person would have considered satisfactory in all the

relevant circumstances. The list of items in the statute to be

considered – fitness for all common purposes, appearance

and finish, freedom from minor defects, safety, and durability -

was not an exhaustive list. The move from 'merchantable

quality' in the old legislation to 'satisfactory

quality' was intended to strengthen the standards for the

customer's benefit. As to the fitness for a particular made

known purpose term, Omega's argument - that its general

knowledge of Pears' business did not meet the requirement that

Pears had made known a specific purpose – failed.

The High...