GROUP 5 – SALE OF GOODS (Acts 1957)

Question
5. Goods sold and delivered are governed by the Sale of Goods Act 1957.

(a)Explain what is a condition and warranty.

(b)Explain what is ‘Nemo dat quod non habet’ (which means no one can give a better title than he has himself).

Section 27 (SOGA 1957)

(c)You have purchased a product and/or item which is not of a merchantable quality. What are the remedies

available to you if you want to proceed to sue the other party for breach of contract? Section 12 (2) SOGA 1957
 SALE:

Sale is commonly defined as the transfer of property from

one person (seller) to another (buyer) for a price; the essence
of sale is the transfer of property (the ownership) for a price
(a money consideration).

 GOODS
A "good" in Sale of Goods Act 1957 defined as every kind of
movable property other than actionable claims and money:
and includes stock and shares, growing crops, grass and
things attached to or farming part of the land which are
agreed to be severed before sale or under the contract of
sale.
 CONTRACT OF SALE

In 4(1) of Sale of Goods Act 1957 defined a contract of sale of

goods is a contract whereby the seller transfers or agrees to
transfer the property in goods to the buyer for a price. There
may be a contract of sale between one part-owner and
another.

Or in generally, contract for sale of goods: “a contract for

sale of goods whereby the seller transfers or agrees to
transfer the property in goods to the buyer for a money
consideration called the price.”
 Nemo Dat Quod Non Habet

The basic rule of sale is that you cannot sell what you do not
own.
It is called as nemo dat quod non habet rule.

Exception nemo dat quod non habet rule defined on Section

27 of SOGA, non-owner seller able to sell the property in
goods when he was expressly authorized by the owner of the
goods.
SALE BY PERSON NOT THE OWNER (MERCHANTILE AGENT)

Sec 27. Sale Of Goods Act 1957

(1) Provided (ON THE PART OF THE SELLER)

that where a mercantile agent is, with the consent of the owner, in
possession of the goods or of a document of title to the goods, any
sale made by him when acting in the ordinary course of business of
a mercantile agent shall be as valid as if he were expressly
authorized by the owner of the goods to make the same;

(2) Provided (ON THE PART OF THE BUYER)

that the buyer acts in good faith and has not at the time of the
contract of sale notice that the seller has no authority to sell.
Ng Ngat Siang v. Arab-Malaysian Finance Bhd. @ Anor (1988) 3
M.L.J.319
In this case, the plaintiff bought a car from the second defendant.
To affect the transfer of ownership of the car into the plaintiff’s
name, the second defendant had to pay off MUI Finance from
whom he had earlier obtained a hire-purchase facility. For this
purpose, the second defendant retained the registration card. After
obtaining the cancellation of endorsement of MUI’s ownership, the
second defendant sold the car to B whose purchase was financed
by the first defendant. The first defendant endorsed its ownership
claim on the registration card. The plaintiff applied to the court to
determine whether or not the first defendant had a better title to
the car.
(Cont’)
The Court held, after a full payment was made by the second
defendant to MUI Finance and MUI Finance had relinquished all
rights to ownership over the car, the plaintiff had acquired
ownership to the car and the second defendant’s further dealings
on the car with the first defendant are therefore illegal. To that end,
the first defendant acquired no title or interest over the car when
they purchased it and their only remedy, if any, is against the
second defendant personally for the return of the purchase price
but as against the plaintiff they cannot claim any right ownership
over the car.