28:
142:
The court ruled that the defect in the radiator was latent, but that the car yard would have been aware of this defect at the time of the sale. The defective radiator made the car unsuitable for what the purchasers wanted to use the car for, namely for towing a boat. That being the case, the sale
126:
However, three days later, during their first trip with their car towing their boat, it overheated due to a latent defect with the radiator. They also discovered problems with the brakes and the steering, and on top of all this, it also had a blown gasket.
118:
Finch Motors ran a car sales yard. In response to a car they advertised for sale, the Quins viewed the car with the view of purchasing it. However, as they planned to use the car for towing a heavy boat, they informed the car yard that they wanted "a
130:
Not satisfied with their recent purchase, they advised the car yard that they were returning the car, which was returned several days later. They cancelled the cheque, and refused the car yard's demands for payment for the car.
149:
The reason why this case is cited as "No. 2", is that this case is also cited in legal circles regarding the cancelled cheque which is known as case "No. 1".
231:
246:
159:
209:
184:
236:
123:
motor car for pulling a heavy boat". After a brief inspection, and a short test drive, the Quins purchased the car.
241:
38:
143:
breached §16(a) of the Sales of Goods Act 1908, and the Quins were entitled to return the car to the dealer.
107:
103:
158:
D J Stephens, "Contractual
Remedies and Sale of Goods" (1981) 7 New Zealand Recent Law (New Series)
79:
205:
180:
27:
225:
102:
2 NZLR 519 is an important case regarding "merchantable quality" under the
120:
85:
75:
70:
62:
54:
44:
34:
20:
204:(4th ed.). LexisNexis. pp. 211–212.
8:
175:Gerbic, Philippa; Lawrence, Martin (2003).
26:
17:
134:The car yard eventually sued the Quins.
202:Butterworths Student Companion Contract
167:
7:
49:Finch Motors Limited v Quin (No 2)
14:
232:High Court of New Zealand cases
99:Finch Motors Ltd v Quin (No 2)
21:Finch Motors Ltd v Quin (No 2)
1:
247:New Zealand contract case law
179:(5th ed.). LexisNexis.
177:Understanding Commercial Law
263:
200:Walker, Campbell (2004).
90:
39:High Court of New Zealand
25:
237:1980 in New Zealand law
108:Consumer Guarantees Act
104:Sale of Goods Act 1908
91:merchantable quality
95:
94:
58:16 September 1980
254:
242:1980 in case law
216:
215:
197:
191:
190:
172:
71:Court membership
30:
18:
262:
261:
257:
256:
255:
253:
252:
251:
222:
221:
220:
219:
212:
199:
198:
194:
187:
174:
173:
169:
155:
140:
116:
12:
11:
5:
260:
258:
250:
249:
244:
239:
234:
224:
223:
218:
217:
210:
192:
185:
166:
165:
164:
163:
154:
151:
139:
136:
115:
112:
93:
92:
88:
87:
83:
82:
77:
73:
72:
68:
67:
64:
60:
59:
56:
52:
51:
46:
45:Full case name
42:
41:
36:
32:
31:
23:
22:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
259:
248:
245:
243:
240:
238:
235:
233:
230:
229:
227:
213:
211:0-408-71770-X
207:
203:
196:
193:
188:
186:0-408-71714-9
182:
178:
171:
168:
161:
157:
156:
152:
150:
148:
144:
137:
135:
132:
128:
124:
122:
113:
111:
109:
105:
101:
100:
89:
84:
81:
80:Hardie Boys J
78:
76:Judge sitting
74:
69:
65:
61:
57:
53:
50:
47:
43:
40:
37:
33:
29:
24:
19:
16:
201:
195:
176:
170:
146:
145:
141:
133:
129:
125:
117:
98:
97:
96:
48:
15:
226:Categories
162:(May 1981)
153:References
114:Background
66:2 NZLR 519
147:Footnote:
138:Decision
110:(1993).
106:and the
86:Keywords
63:Citation
55:Decided
208:
183:
35:Court
206:ISBN
181:ISBN
160:133
228::
121:V8
214:.
189:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
