4. Dairy Co. sells raw cream directly to the public. Maxwell gets sick after consuming some of Fairy Co.'s raw cream. Maxwell sues Dairy Co. and argues that the raw cream is a "good" under the definition in Division 2 of the Commercial Code (UCC) and, therefore, the provisions of Division 2 apply to the contract. Dairy Co. argues that the raw cream is not a "good" and, therefore, the common law of contracts applies.

Which provisions (of the UCC, or other laws) do you think Maxwell is applying in this case? Who wins, and why?

Question

Business

Guest

1 June, 10:54

4. Dairy Co. sells raw cream directly to the public. Maxwell gets sick after consuming some of Fairy Co.'s raw cream. Maxwell sues Dairy Co. and argues that the raw cream is a "good" under the definition in Division 2 of the Commercial Code (UCC) and, therefore, the provisions of Division 2 apply to the contract. Dairy Co. argues that the raw cream is not a "good" and, therefore, the common law of contracts applies.

Which provisions (of the UCC, or other laws) do you think Maxwell is applying in this case? Who wins, and why?

+2

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Lindsey Cox · Answer 1

Maxwell will win this case, as per division 2 of UCC, seller bears the cost for loss under implied warranty of fitness, if the goods do not meet the ordinary purpose or is inefficient.

Explanation:

Given in this case, Maxwell is applying "Universal Commercial Code (UCC) " division 2 provision, which defines all the goods and services.

A movable property, which can be sold from seller to the buyer at certain prices are called goods. Therefore, in this case, "Raw Cream" comes in the definition of goods, as it is directly sold to Maxwell by the grocery shop.

Maxwell will win this case, as per division 2 of UCC, seller bears the cost for loss under implied warranty of fitness, if the goods do not meet the ordinary purpose or is inefficient.