ABSTRACT
We have seen that if a purchaser of goods suffers damage as a result of the goods proving defective, the seller, providing that he sold the goods in the course of a business, is liable to the buyer under s 14 of the Sale of Goods Act or analogous legislation. The buyer alleges that the goods were not of satisfactory quality or that they were not fit for their purpose. In such a case, liability is strict. This means that it is imposed irrespective of fault on the part of the supplier. Thus, if your new television explodes, burning your hand, when you switch it on for the first time, it is no use your high street retailer arguing that he did not manufacture the television which came straight out of the manufacturer’s box into your lounge and that, therefore, he is not liable for the damage. He is liable to you for breach of contract. The injustice in this is often more apparent than real, since the retailer will have an action against his supplier for breach of s 14, and so forth back along the chain of supply until the buck stops with the manufacturer. The only time that this might not happen is if one person in the chain of supply cannot effectively be sued for some reason, for example, because he is insolvent or because he is protected from liability by an effective exemption clause.
