Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Final Presentation

    Uploaded by

    Vineed Biju
    29 views10 pages
    The summary is as follows: 1. Air Transworld Ltd entered into an agreement with Bombardier Inc. to purchase an aircraft, which was manufactured and delivered in March 2009. 2. 14 months later, the aircraft experienced problems with its hydraulic system and flight controls, requiring an unscheduled landing. Air Transworld Ltd then sought to reject the aircraft. 3. The agreement contained a clause that stated warranties, obligations, and liabilities of the seller were exclusive and the buyer waived all rights by law. It did not explicitly use the term "condition". 4. The court ruled in favor of Bombardier Inc., finding that although the term "condition" was not used, the

    Original Description:

    LAW

    Original Title

    Final Presentation PPT

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The summary is as follows: 1. Air Transworld Ltd entered into an agreement with Bombardier Inc. to purchase an aircraft, which was manufactured and delivered in March 2009. 2. 14 months later, the aircraft experienced problems with its hydraulic system and flight controls, requiring an unscheduled landing. Air Transworld Ltd then sought to reject the aircraft. 3. The agreement contained a clause that stated warranties, obligations, and liabilities of the seller were exclusive and the buyer waived all rights by law. It did not explicitly use the term "condition". 4. The court ruled in favor of Bombardier Inc., finding that although the term "condition" was not used, the

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    29 views10 pages

    Final Presentation

    Uploaded by

    Vineed Biju
    The summary is as follows: 1. Air Transworld Ltd entered into an agreement with Bombardier Inc. to purchase an aircraft, which was manufactured and delivered in March 2009. 2. 14 months later, the aircraft experienced problems with its hydraulic system and flight controls, requiring an unscheduled landing. Air Transworld Ltd then sought to reject the aircraft. 3. The agreement contained a clause that stated warranties, obligations, and liabilities of the seller were exclusive and the buyer waived all rights by law. It did not explicitly use the term "condition". 4. The court ruled in favor of Bombardier Inc., finding that although the term "condition" was not used, the

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    of 10

    Air Transworld Ltd v Bombardier

    Inc. [2012]
    Presented by

    P17007 - Vineed Biju


    P17018 - Abhishek Gupta
    P17039 - Ishani Srivastava
    P17047 - Utkarsh Vatshal
    P17050 - Abhishek Kumar
    P17055 - Pruthiviraj Mansingh
    Principles
    • Law of Sale of Goods -Buyer has the right to
    terminate contract
    • If goods not merchantable
    Implied
    • Non conforming with description Condition
    • Or suitable for stated purpose

    • Seller can oust implied condition and


    warranties by explicitly mentioning it in clear
    terms
    Case Facts
    • Air Transworld Ltd entered into agreement with Bombardier Inc. to buy
    an aircraft

    Manufactured and
    delivered in March 2009
    Case Facts
    • Clause 4.1 of Purchase Agreement reads
    “Warranty, obligations and liabilities of seller and the rights
    of the buyer …in the agreement are exclusive and buyer
    ….waives and releases all …obligations…by law….”

    – Does not use the term ‘Condition’


    Case Facts
    • 14 months later in May 2010
    – Problem with hydraulic system and flight controls
    – Unscheduled landing in Algeria

    • Hence, buyer wrote a letter of rejection to


    manufacturer
    Arguments
    • Buyer–
    – Implied conditions not excluded as the term was
    not used in the exclusion clause

    • Defendant–
    – Intention was clearly in the clause
    – Can be done by with/without using the term
    ‘conditions’
    Question in Dispute

    Does the terms of the contract exclude the implied


    conditions since the term ‘condition’ was not used ….?

    Which competing approaches to construction?


    1. Clear express words or
    2. Natural Meaning of the words used?
    Judgment
    • In favor of defendant
    – Any clause in the contract must be construed in
    the context
    – The clause was not ambiguous
    – From the context, only one meaning can be made

    • Here, express terms left no doubt that the


    implied conditions were being excluded
    Learning

    • Express words need not required as long as


    natural meaning makes it clear in the context

    • Recommended to use comprehensive language referring to


    conditions as well as warranties and any other terms.

    • More valuable the right, cleared the language


    needs to be.
    Thank you…

    You might also like