These are conditions and warranties that the law presumes to exist in a contract of sale, even if not explicitly stated by the parties.

1. Implied Condition as to Title (Section 14):

In a contract of sale, there is an implied condition that the seller has the right to sell the goods. In an agreement to sell, he will have the right to sell at the time when the property is to pass. The buyer gets good title to the goods. If the seller's title is defective, the buyer can reject the goods and recover the full price.

Illustration: A buys a car from B, who later turns out to be a thief. A has to return the car to the true owner. A can sue B for the full price as B breached the implied condition as to title.

Landmark Case: Rowland v. Divall (1923) 2 KB 500

Facts: The plaintiff bought a motor car from the defendant and used it for several months. It was then discovered that the defendant had no title to the car, and the plaintiff had to return it to the true owner.

Held: The court held that there was a total failure of consideration, and the plaintiff was entitled to recover the full purchase price even though he had used the car for some time. The implied condition as to title was breached.

2. Sale by Description (Section 15):

Where there is a contract for the sale of goods by description, there is an implied condition that the goods shall correspond with the description.

If goods are sold based on a description (e.g., ‘Basmati Rice’, ‘Pure Silk Saree’), they must match that description.

Illustration: A orders “20 bags of rice of Basmati quality.” The seller delivers ordinary rice. A can reject the goods.

Case Law: Varley v. Whipp (1900) 1 QB 513

Facts: A sold a reaping machine to B, describing it as “nearly new” and “used to cut only 50 or 60 acres.” When delivered, B found it to be very old and defective.

Held: The court held that there was a breach of the implied condition that the goods should correspond with the description, and the buyer was entitled to return the machine.

3. Implied Conditions as to Quality or Fitness (Section 16):

Generally, there is no implied condition as to the quality or fitness for any particular purpose of goods supplied (Caveat Emptor - let the buyer beware).

Exceptions (where implied condition as to fitness applies):

• Specific Purpose: The buyer expressly or by implication makes known to the seller the particular purpose for which the goods are required.

• Reliance on Seller's Skill/Judgment: The buyer relies on the seller's skill or judgment.

• Seller's Business: The goods are of a description which it is in the course of the seller's business to supply.

• Merchantable Quality: Goods bought by description from a seller who deals in goods of that description (whether he is the manufacturer or not) must be of merchantable quality.

• • Merchantable Quality: Goods are of merchantable quality if they are fit for the purpose for which goods of that kind are commonly bought, and are of such quality as is reasonable to expect, taking into account any description, the price, and all other relevant circumstances.

• Usage of Trade: An implied warranty or condition as to quality or fitness for a particular purpose may be annexed by the usage of trade.

• Latent Defects: If the buyer has examined the goods, there is no implied condition as regards defects which such examination ought to have revealed. However, for latent defects (not discoverable on reasonable examination), the implied condition of merchantability still applies.

Illustration:

• • Fitness for Purpose: A buy’s a pair of hiking boots from a sports shop, informing the seller that he needs them for a Himalayan expedition. If the boots turn out to be unsuitable for extreme cold or rough terrain, there's a breach of implied condition as to fitness.
• • Merchantable Quality: A buy’s a packet of biscuits. If the biscuits are stale or contaminated, they are not of merchantable quality.

Landmark Cases:

• Priest v. Last (1903) 2 KB 148

• Facts: A bought a hot water bottle from a chemist. He told the chemist it was for his wife, who had a cold. The bottle burst and injured his wife.
• Held: The chemist was liable as the buyer had made known the purpose and relied on the seller's skill. There was a breach of implied condition as to fitness.

• Grant v. Australian Knitting Mills Ltd. (1936) AC 85

• Facts: The plaintiff bought underwear which caused a severe skin rash due to excess sulphites left in the manufacturing process.
• Held: The goods were not of merchantable quality, and the manufacturer was liable. This case established that “merchantable quality” means that the goods should be reasonably fit for the general purpose for which they are sold.

4. Sale by Sample (Section 17):

A contract of sale is a contract for sale by sample where there is a term in the contract, express or implied, to that effect.

Implied Conditions:

• The bulk shall correspond with the sample in quality.
• The buyer shall have a reasonable opportunity of comparing the bulk with the sample.
• The goods shall be free from any defect, rendering them unmerchantable, which would not be apparent on reasonable examination of the sample (i.e., latent defects).

Illustration: A buy’s a consignment of rice after examining a sample. The bulk delivered must match the quality of the sample, and A must have the opportunity to compare them. If there's a hidden defect in the bulk not present in the sample, A can reject the goods.

Case Law: Wallis v. Pratt & Haynes (1911) AC 394

Facts: Sale of “Common English Sainfoin” seed by sample. The delivered bulk was inferior, Giant Sainfoin, which was impossible to distinguish from the sample by reasonable examination.

Held: There was a breach of the condition that the bulk should correspond with the sample in quality, and also that the goods should be free from any defect not apparent on reasonable examination of the sample.