Question

On 1 November 2019, Billy, who worked as a banker, returned from Japan for business trip with his luggage in the Hong Kong Airport. There was a long queue for taxi, so he decided to take the airport shuttle bus to meet an important client, Success Ltd., concerning a loan arrangement for the merger and acquisition. Because Billy was in a hurry, he left his luggage in the shuttle bus. The luggage contained his proposal and some business documents related to Success Ltd. which were important and confidential. Billy was extremely nervous to get his luggage back and put an advertisement in a local newspapers. The advertisement mentioned that he was willing to pay a reward of HK$20,000 to any person who returned the luggage to him. To show his sincerity, Billy also deposited HK$5,000 as deposit in the bank account.

This has also been referred in the newspapers advertisement. David, the shuttle bus driver, found Billy’s luggage in the shuttle bus, went to the address printed on the tag of the luggage, and returned the luggage to Billy, without reading the advertisement. Billy was very delighted that his luggage was returned and gave David HK1,000 as a reward for his help. David subsequently read the newspapers advertisement and now wants to claim the HK$20,000 reward. Billy refused to pay and said that David was not entitled to the reward. In fact, Billy would like to claim back the HK$1,000 reward that he paid earlier to David. Billy then went to a skiing holiday. Before leaving he orders a grey carpet for his new home from Quality Carpet Ltd’s (QCL) sample book and has paid HK$20,000 to QCL. The back of the sample has a sticker on it which describes the carpet as 100 percent wool. Billy also bought an expensive set of new skis from Alpine Ltd. (AL) for HK$25,000. The first time Billy uses the skis they snap into pieces. On his return from holiday, Billy discovers the colour of the carpet is pink and 100 percent polypropylene. Early this month, Billy booked his car into Tan’s garage for a service. When he collected the car Tan told Billy that the work was complete, but in fact, Tan had forgotten to fully tighten the handbrake cable. Billy lived on a hill and when he got home he applied the handbrake and got out. The handbrake failed to hold the car which rolled down the hill and crushed Jill, who was loading shopping into the back of her car. As a result of the collision, Billy’s car was damaged and Jill was injured.

Advise Billy as to her rights and remedies against QCL and AL under sale of goods law.

Answer 1

• Section 168 allows the finder retain the goods against the owner until he receives compensation for trouble and expense. Further where the owner has offered a specific reward for the return of the goods lost, the finder may sue for reward and may retain the goodsuntil he receives it.
• However, since the driver has not returned the baggage out of reading the advertisement in newspaper , he is not entitled to claim the award for return of Billy's baggage.
• Secondly,

  Where there is a breach of warranty by the seller, or where the buyer elects or is compelled to treat any breach of a condition on the part of the seller as a breach of warranty, the buyer is not by reason only of such breach of warranty entitled to reject the goods; but he may-

  (a) Set up against the seller the Brach of warranty in diminution or extinction of the price; or

  (b) Sue the seller for damages for breach of warranty.

  (2) The fact that a buyer has set up a breach of warranty in diminution or extinction of the price does not prevent him from suing for the same breach of warranty if he has suffered further damage. Therefore, with regards to the broken skies, billy has abouv mentioned remedies available under sale of goods law.

• Further, to sue for the quality of carpet purchased by Billy he may seek justice under of following provisions of breach remedies under sale of goods law-

• Subject to the provisions of the Specific Relief Act, 1877, in any suit for breach of contract to deliver specific or ascertained goods, the court, may, if it deems fit, on the application of the plaintiff, by its decree direct that the contract shall be performed specifically, without giving the defendant the option of retaining the goods on the payment of damages. The decree may be unconditional, or upon such terms and conditions as to damages, payment of the price, or otherwise, as the Court may deem just, and the application of the plaintiff may be made at any time before the decree.

• Lastly, since the Tan has not given specific performance in his contract with Billy and has failed to tighten the break fully, BilyB can sue Tan for the specific performance and is also entitled to receive damages due to the accident down the hill . He can recover the damanfe caused to car and that he need to pay to Jill along with interest.