• Oliver Bray and Ben Kerry, ‘Digital Content under the Consumer Rights Act 2015’ [2015] Entertainment Law Review 271

Discusses the CRA 2015 as it applies to digital content, its terms and remedies.

• Ian Brown, ‘Forgery, Fine Art and the Sale of Goods’ (1990) 106 LQR 561.

Discusses the Court of Appeal’s decision in H arlingdon & Leinster Enterprises Ltd v Christopher Hull Fine Art Ltd and the recurrent diffi culties of scope and interrelation of the implied terms contained in ss 13 and 14(2) of the SGA 1979.

• Ian Brown, ‘The Meaning of Merchantable Quality in Sales of Goods: Quality or Fitness for Purpose? ‘[1987] LMCLQ 400.

Discusses the meaning of merchantable quality against the decisions of the Court of
Appeal in Rogers v Parish (Scarborough) Ltd and Aswan Engineering Establishment Co v Lupdine Ltd.

• Ian Brown , ‘ Sales of Goods in the Course of a Business ’ ( 1999 ) 115 LQR 384

Discusses whether the implied condition of merchantability applied to the sale of a fishing boat where the vendor, who had established a business as a fisherman, only occasionally sold on boats he had previously used in his business.

• W Cowan Ervine, ‘Satisfactory Quality: What Does it Mean? ’ [2004] JBL 68.

Considers the term implied in contracts of sale under s 14(2) of the SGA 1979 that goods should be of satisfactory quality. Discusses the background to the Act and the section. Examines case law in which the satisfactory quality term and related issues have been considered by the courts, including the relationship between fitness for a particular purpose and satisfactory quality, the relevance of the description applied to goods in assessing the standard of quality that could be expected, and the factors that may be taken into account in determining satisfactory quality.

• Brian Elkan, ‘Sale of Goods and Patent Infringement ’ (1975) 34 CLJ 199.

Discusses the Court of Appeal’s judgment in Microbeads AG v Vinhurst Road Markings Ltd in relation to a breach of s 12(1) and (2) of the SGA 1979, when the goods sold were affected by a patent that was applied for before but only granted after the sale.

• Ingrid Patient, ‘Ruminating on Mink Food’ (1971) 34 MLR 557.

Discusses the missed opportunity of the House of Lords when reversing the Court of
Appeal’s judgment in Ashington Piggeries v Christopher Hill, especially in relation to settling a number of difficulties relating to ss 13 and 14 of the SGA 1893.

• Diane Price, ‘When is a Consumer Not a Consumer?’ (1989) 52 MLR 245.

Examines the meaning of ‘consumer’ as it applies to contracts of sale of goods.

• Christian Twigg-Flesner , ‘The Relationship Between Satisfactory Quality and Fitness for Purpose’ (2004) 63 CLJ 22.

Examines the Court of Appeal’s ruling in Jewson v Boyhan in which the defendant claimed that the boilers supplied by the sellers were sold in breach of s 14(2) and (3) of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 as they did not reach the acceptable Standard Assessment Procedure ratings for energy efficiency for residential dwellings. Discusses the relationship and distinction between these two subsections.

• James Wilson, ‘ Battle of the Bentley ’ ( 2012 ) 162 NLJ 510.

Discusses the Court of Appeal’s ruling in Brewer v Mann that a Bentley dealer did not breach a collateral warranty that the car sold would be a genuine 1930 ‘Speed Six’ containing an authentic engine. Notes the distinction drawn between an authentic and continuous documentary history, and an item’s description.