PARK v WRAGGE [1993] NSWCA 204

PARK v WRAGGE [1993] NSWCA 204

The trial judge’s finding that the plaintiff did not rely on the defendant’s skill and judgment nor was there an express warranty of a germination test meant the claim under s19(1) Sale of Goods Act 1923 failed. There was no proper basis to disturb these findings, particularly given the plaintiff's own evidence regarding his experience and the factual conversation.

Parties
Appellant: Mr Park; Respondent: Mr Wragge
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 April 1993
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Reliance on Skill or Judgment, Implied Terms, Express Warranty, Fact Finding, Fitness for Purpose
Sale of Goods Contract Reliance on Skill or Judgment Implied Terms Express Warranty Fact Finding Fitness for Purpose

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Park

Appellant

Mr Wragge

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the plaintiff rely on the defendant’s skill and judgment in the purchase of barley seed under s19(1) of the Sale of Goods Act 1923?
  2. 2 Was there an express warranty made by the defendant regarding a germination test showing 100% success?

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge’s finding that the plaintiff did not rely on the defendant’s skill and judgment nor was there an express warranty of a germination test meant the claim under s19(1) Sale of Goods Act 1923 failed. There was no proper basis to disturb these findings, particularly given the plaintiff's own evidence regarding his experience and the factual conversation.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.