merchantable quality

The Act says that goods should be of merchantable quality.

At first instance, the judge held that the car was not of merchantable quality.

When any goods are bought they should be of merchantable quality.

The first relates to the implied term as to merchantable quality.

Goods must be of merchantable quality, fit for their purpose and as described.

These buckets were held to be of merchantable quality (but see paragraph 7-22 below).

You're entitled to a full refund because the goods aren't of merchantable quality.

The state of the packing affected the merchantable quality of the goods.

The concept of merchantable quality is one of degree.

The computer must be of merchantable quality.

It being a consumer deal, the condition as to merchantable quality could not be excluded and the sellers were therefore liable.

By their work they are promoting the idea that goods should be of merchantable quality and fit for their purpose.

Goods can, for instance, be accepted as of merchantable quality, and then manifest a defect sometime afterwards.

The Scania soon proved to be seriously defective and not of merchantable quality.

Marine's) liability for breach of the statutory implied terms as to merchantable quality and fitness for purpose.

Merchantable qualities.

The product is not of merchantable quality and it is not fit for the purpose for which it was sold.

Merchantable quality - section 14(2)

Now, i.e. since 1973, there is a statutory definition of 'merchantable quality.'

Goods sold as 'animal food' are of merchantable quality if suitable for feeding to most kinds of cattle and poultry.

It is submitted that this approach inhibits the development of an appropriate standard and definition of merchantable quality, especially in a non-consumer setting.

The Sale of Goods Act 1979 states that goods must be of merchantable quality when you buy them.

Merchantable Quality Section 14(2)

However, food sold as 'mink food' is not of merchantable quality if it is poisonous to mink.

The buyers, Rasbora Ltd., sued the sellers for breach of the implied term as to merchantable quality.