Douglas v Glenvarigill Company Ltd [2010] ScotCS CSOH_14 (05 February 2010)

Douglas v Glenvarigill Company Ltd [2010] ScotCS CSOH_14 (05 February 2010)

The car was not of satisfactory quality at delivery due to a latent but serious defect in the dash control module, which existed from manufacture. However, the pursuer lost the right to reject the car because a reasonable time for rejection had elapsed (15 months) before the defect was reported and rejection intimated. The pursuer is entitled to damages but not to reject the car.

Citation
[2010] ScotCS CSOH_14
Parties
Pursuer: David Douglas; Defender: Glenvarigill Company Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
05 February 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil (sale of Goods – Breach of Contract) / Judgment After Proof Before Answer
Outcome
Pursuer entitled to damages for breach of contract; right to reject refused.
Legal Topics
Implied Terms – Satisfactory Quality, Right to Reject Goods, Latent Defects, Reasonable Time for Rejection, Damages for Breach of Contract
Contract Law Consumer Law Sale of Goods Implied Terms – Satisfactory Quality Right to Reject Goods Latent Defects Reasonable Time for Rejection Damages for Breach of Contract

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 4 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Douglas

Pursuer

Glenvarigill Company Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil (sale of Goods – Breach of Contract) / Judgment After Proof Before Answer

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the car was of satisfactory quality at the time of sale under section 14 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer was entitled to reject the car under section 15B of the Sale of Goods Act 1979
  3. 3 Whether rejection was intimated within a reasonable time under section 35 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979

Ratio Decidendi

The car was not of satisfactory quality at delivery due to a latent but serious defect in the dash control module, which existed from manufacture. However, the pursuer lost the right to reject the car because a reasonable time for rejection had elapsed (15 months) before the defect was reported and rejection intimated. The pursuer is entitled to damages but not to reject the car.

Court Disposition

Pursuer entitled to damages for breach of contract; right to reject refused.

Orders

  • Declarator of right to reject refused.
  • Damages to be assessed for breach of contract.