Why was the purchaser entitled to rescind the contract in Hammer & Barrow v Coca-Cola [1962] NZLR 723?
A) The shortfall was insignificant.
B) More than 80% of the goods were defective.
C) The purchaser was not entitled to rescind the contract.
D) Delivery by instalments had not been agreed to.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q30: Which of the following is NOT an
Q31: Future goods are goods identified and agreed
Q32: Which of the following statements is the
Q33: Why was the buyer able to refuse
Q34: What are unascertained goods?
Q36: The purpose of a Romalpa clause is
Q37: In the context of an unconditional contract
Q38: Which of the following is the best
Q39: Absent an agreement to the contrary, the
Q40: Which of the following is NOT a
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents