12

TUESDAY, APRIL 3, 1990

TO

MISS LOH POINTED OUT THAT THE ABOVE RECOMMENDATION IS MEANT

THAT IF THE COMMISSION HOPED CONTROL EXTREME CASES OF UNFAIRNESS.

SOME PLACE THAT IT WOULD HAVE THERE WAS SUCH LEGISLATION IN

WHEN THEY DRAFTED THEIR SALES RESTRAINING EFFECT ON CORPORATIONS CONTRACTS TO ENSURE THAT THERE WAS A BALANCE BETWEEN THE INTERESTS THE CORPORATIONS AND THAT OF CONSUMERS.

OF

THE COMMISSION HAD NOT RECOMMENDED SIMILAR LEGISLATIVE FOR COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS BUSINESSMEN WERE BETTER ABLE TO AND PROTECT THEIR INTERESTS.

BECAUSE

CONTROL THE VIEW THAT MAINTAINED IT

THEIR BUSINESS NEGOTIATE

CONTRACTS

THE ORDINANCE LOST THE

MISS LOH ALSO POINTED OUT THAT SECTION 13(3) OF HAD THE EFFECT THAT IF A BUYER ACCEPTED DEFECTIVE GOODS, HE RIGHT TO REJECT THEM AND COULD ONLY RESORT TO CLAIMING DAMAGES.

THE

ΤΟ HAVE BREN ONE OF THE SITUATIONS IN WHICH THERE WAS DEEMED

WAS ORDINANCE

WHEN ACCEPTANCE PROVIDED UNDER SECTION 37 OF THE BUYER EXPRESSLY ACCEPTED THE GOODS.

A

IN RELATION TO EXPRESS ACCEPTANCE, IT IS COMMON PRACTICE FOR

AND BEFORE BUYER TO BE ASKED TO SIGN A NOTE ON DELIVERY OF THE GOODS THE BUYER HAS HAD A CHANCE TO EXAMINE THE GOODS.

BUYER CANNOT BE SECTION 36(1) OF THE ORDINANCE STATES THAT A

WHICH HE HAS NOT HAD A REASONABLE DERMED TO HAVE ACCEPTED GOODS CHANCE OF EXAMINING.

RESULT UNLESS HE HAD HAD A

THIS SECTION BE AMENDED TO THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDED THAT STATE CLEARLY THAT THE SIGNING OF AN ACCEPTANCE NOTE WOULD NOT IN THE LOSS OF THE CONSUMER'S RIGHT TO REJECT REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO EXAMINE THE GOODS.

SERVICES, MISS LOH SAID

ON THE OBLIGATIONS OF A SUPPLIER OF THAT COMMON LAW PRINCIPLES WERE APPLICABLE WITH REGARD TO THE QUALITY OF THE SERVICES, THE TIME FOR PERFORMANCE AND IT, BUT THERE WAS NO STATUTE IN HONG KONG IN THIS AREA.

THE CONSIDERATION FOR

HONG KONG ADOPT LEGISLATION SERVICES ACT 1982 WHICH

THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDED THAT SIMILAR TO THE ENGLISH SUPPLY OF GOODS AND SET OUT THE MAIN COMMON LAW OBLIGATIONS.

THE COMMISSION EXAMINED THE EXISTING OBLIGATION OF A SELLER OF GOODS "OF GOODS UNDER

ORDINANCE TO SUPPLY THE SALE OF GOODS MERCHANTABLE QUALITY AND REASONABLY FIT FOR THEIR PURPOSE" IN

16.

SAID, LOH

SECTION

A NEGATIVE ESSENTIALLY WAS 16, SECTION

MISS

EFFECT STATEMENT WITH EXCEPTIONS. IN ITS PRESENT FORM, THE SECTION IN SAID THAT EXCEPT AS PROVIDED HERE AND IN OTHER STATUTES, THERE WAS IMPLIED TERM AS TO QUALITY.

NO

/THE COMMISSION

Share This Page