FavoriteLoadingSave to briefcase | Rating: | By (2012)

  • PrintEmail Link
  • Viewed 237 times | Saved to 298 briefcases
International Business Machines v Scherban, [1925] 1 DLR 864

Facts:

D refused to accept a device because a piece of glass, which would cost cents, was broken. Arguing it is not of merchantable quality. Device bought for Ds own use.

Issue(s):

Is the adding machine merchantable?

Ratio:

Merchantability means the buyer is entitled to receive the goods in perfect condition allowing the buyer to resell the goods. Minor defects may render goods unmerchantable.

Analysis:

Dissent: Case comes w/in de minimis non curat lex - D should not have rejected the device
Majority: Scale delivered was not of merchantable quality. The “quality” of goods include their state or condition

Holding:

D had every right to reject the dial – the maxim does not apply in this case


Discussion

  1. above the law 4

    Does not apply to produce? :)

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to participate.

This document is a general discussion of certain legal and related issues and must not be relied upon as legal advice. This document may not have been written or reviewed by a legal practitioner. For more information, please see the website Terms of Service.