Check Assignment Criteria for the question Essay

Check Assignment Criteria for the question - Essay Example In July 2007, Makers (UK) Ltd (Makers) placed an order for the delivery of Uponor and compression adapters from BSS Group Plc (BSS), which would be used for plumbing. One month later, Makers tendered an additional request for more goods from the supplier. BSS continued with quotation for and supply of the additional merchandise including their internally made brand valve instead of a specified Uponor valve. The buyer then closed one of its Uponor tubes with an Uponor brand adaptor and a BSS valve. The buyer later noticed that the Uponor adaptor was incompatible with the BSS valve, a development that severely affected the plumbing work as part of refurbishment of a public residence in Cambridge4. The incompatible adaptor and valve were fitted anyway, but within a few hours of operation, the valve collapsed under pressure, causing a devastating flood to the lower floors of the building. The issue that was brought before the judges for determination was whether the supplier had violated the implied term in the transaction relative to the items’ fitness for purpose as provided for in section 14(3) of the Sale of Goods Act 1979. Citing section 14(3) of the Sale of Goods Act 1979, the buyer argued that the BSS valves did not meet the required threshold of fitness for purpose because they were not compatible for the function that they were required5. The claimant contended that it was incumbent upon BSS to know the function of the items6. In deliberating BSS’ case, the Appellate Court held that the defendant was deemed to have violated section 14 (3) of the legislation because he disregarded the information which the buyer had made clear to him. Legally parties to a contract must act on either express or implicit information about an item’s condition of fitness for sale. A seller who proceeds to sell an item is deemed to have considered the item’s fit for use for a particular