Case

Law Case

a) Cheung purchased Windspeed, a race horse, from Raja, a well-known breeder of horses.

An important point for both the Buyer and Seller of horses is whether or not the Seller sells the horse in the course of a business (e.g. a professional dealer). If a Seller does sell in the course of a business the Seller will have to comply with the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) which affords the Buyer (as a consumer) greater protection and will allow the law to intervene to rectify any unfair sale (for example because the horse is not reasonably fit for its purpose or of satisfactory quality). It is not always obvious whether a Seller is acting in the course of a business, but a Court will examine all the circumstances in any matter, and generally takes a wide interpretation.

If the sale takes place between two private individuals, the Buyer will still be able to rely upon the Law of Contract if there has been any breach and specifically the Misrepresentation Act 1967. Where a horse has been described in an advertisement or the Seller has made oral representations to the Buyer about the horse prior to purchase (for example, describing the horse as schoolmaster), the Seller is making 'representations' about the horse and if those representations are discovered to be untrue after purchase, the Seller will have misrepresented the horse to the Buyer and the Buyer will then be entitled to reject the horse or alternatively claim damages.

Whether the Seller sells in the course of a business or not, it is the Buyer's responsibility to carry out a physical examination of the horse. The Buyer will not have any comeback against a Seller for a physical defect in the horse that could have been revealed had they examined the horse. Sensibly, most Buyers will have a Horse vetted prior to sale. If a physical defect later comes to light that ought to have been revealed by the vetting, the Buyer's course of action will be against the vet who carried out the vetting rather than the Seller.

Unfortunately it is a common misconception on the behalf of Professional Sellers that inserting the phrase “sold as seen” in a contract or receipt will protect them from any comeback for a physical defect, however, that is not correct for the Professional Seller. If a defect (e.g. navicular) is discovered post sale that could not have been reasonably discoverable upon examination and the Buyer is able to establish that the defect would have been present at the time of sale, the Buyer will have a claim against the Seller by relying on the Sale of Goods Act (because arguably, the horse may then not be either of satisfactory quality or reasonably fit for its purpose). A 2002 amendment to the Sale of Goods Act has increased and made more practical the remedies available to Buyers. A Buyer may now reject goods (a horse) at any time during a two year period after sale, ...