WARNING.

The format of this question paper was changed due the COVID-19 pandemic and applies to the 2019-20 examinations only.

LA2017 July ZB

Commercial law

Wednesday 29 July 2020

You will have TWO HOURS AND 45 MINUTES in which to answer the
questions, including 15 minutes reading time. You must answer all parts of a
question unless otherwise stated.

You will have an additional 30 minutes to download the examination paper and
to upload your saved answers to the VLE; this time should be used solely for
these purposes.

You must answer TWO of the following SIX questions.

© University of London 2020

Page 1 of 3
WARNING. The format of this question paper was changed due the COVID-19 pandemic and applies to the 2019-20 examinations only.

1. ‘Commercial law is clear and predictable, providing a firm body of rules

on which traders can depend.’ (Lord Irvine of Lairg LC (2001).)

Discuss.

2. Caffe Lazio are a supplier of coffee beans and coffee roasting

equipment. Their standard written terms of business contain the
following clause:

“By this term, the Seller reserves title to all goods supplied under this
agreement and all goods mixed with, manufactured or derived from or
incorporating goods supplied under this agreement. Should the Buyer
dispose of any goods supplied under this agreement they do so as
fiduciary agent of the Seller and shall hold for the Seller the proceeds of
any such sale or disposition.”

Caffe Lazio contracted to sell to Buono Ltd., a company that roasts and
blends coffee, a Ferrici coffee roaster machine and 20x25kg sacks of
raw coffee beans.

10x25kg sacks of coffee beans were roasted. The roasted beans were
put back into the sacks in which they were originally supplied. The sacks
identify that they were supplied by Caffe Lazio.

The other 10x25kg bags were mixed with 50kg of beans of lower quality
coffee beans supplied by two other suppliers, roasted, ground and
placed in sealed 5kg bags ready for sale.

The Ferrici coffee roaster has been heavily used. Last week several
parts were removed and sold as spares to raise cash for the business.
The sale raised £400. The proceeds of sale are now in Buono’s only
bank account.

Buono are now in insolvent liquidation. Caffe Lazio’s invoices for the
goods remain unpaid. Caffe Lazio are now seeking advice on the
enforceability of their retention of title clause.

Advise Caffe Lazio.

3. ‘The common law has such a simplistic concept of “a bank” and the
relationship it has with its customer, that it is of no real relevance
anymore.’

Discuss.

Page 2 of 3
WARNING. The format of this question paper was changed due the COVID-19 pandemic and applies to the 2019-20 examinations only.

4. Baker Ltd are a small furniture making company. They purchase many
of the supplies they need from Hicks Ltd, a national chain of home
improvement stores.

Baker recently purchased the following from Hicks:

(a) A table saw, which was on display on the shop floor. On the table
saw was a notice which said, “ex-display, no box, absolutely the
last one, amazing price, sold as seen!”. Baker bought the table
saw because their existing table saw was undergoing lengthy
repairs. After three weeks they noticed that the safety guards
were not properly installed. Their old saw is now repaired and
they no longer wish to keep the one they bought from Hicks.

(b) A Tough-Rock Bluetooth speaker, which Hicks advertises as, “the

world’s toughest portable Bluetooth speaker, takes whatever you
throw at it, perfect if you’re on site or in the workshop”. Hicks
recommended the speaker to Baker after being told it was to be
used in a furniture workshop.

The speaker developed a fault three months after it was

purchased. Hicks claim this was as a result of wood shavings
penetrating the casing, which they attribute to Baker’s careless
use of the radio.

(c) One hundred two-metre staves of Italian black walnut. When

delivered, half of the staves are clearly American black walnut
which grow more quickly and so are lighter in colour, despite
having otherwise identical characteristics.

Advise Baker.

5. ‘Criticisms of the exceptions to the nemo dat rule set out in the Sale of
Goods Act 1979 abound and they are wholly justified.’

Discuss.

6. ‘Sellers of goods too often make substantial use of security and quasi-
security with good reason – the remedies afforded to unpaid seller under
the Sale of Goods Act 1979 are wholly inadequate.’

Discuss.

END OF PAPER

Page 3 of 3