Facts: The claimant agreed by contract to purchase some hops to be used for making beer. He asked the seller if the hops had been treated with sulphur and told him if they had he wouldn't buy them as he would not be able to use them for making beer if they had. The seller assured him that the hops had not been treated with sulphur. In fact they had been treated with sulphur

Held: The statement that the hops had not been treated with sulphur was a term of the contract rather than a representation as the claimant had communicated the importance of the term and relied on the statement. His action for breach of contract was successful.

Facts: Both parties were in the industry of hiring plants

Held: The court implied a term on a custom that if a crane sunk in the marsh land the cost was for the defendant to deal with

Facts: A dealer sold a car and said it had done 20,000 miles. Relying on this the plaintiff (i.e. claimant) bought the car. The plaintiff soon discovered issues and noticed it had done 100,000+ miles. The plaintiff bought and action for breach of contract

Held: The Court of Appeal said it was a term as the dealer had a specialist knowledge so should have known the true mileage of the car

Facts: In the case a ship was leased. The contract said the ship should be “seaworthy” and “be in every way fitted for ordinary cargo service”. The term was breached meaning the ship could not be at sea for the full amount of time. The court had to determine whether the term was a condition or warranty as it was an innominate term.

Held: The defendants wanted the term to be a condition, but the Court of Appeal said it was a warranty. Court looked at the seriousness and consequences of the breach as well as the other terms in the contract to decide

Facts: Schuler were manufacturers of certain tools and Wickman were a sales company granted the sole right to sell certain tools manufactured by Schuler. A term of the contract between the parties was described in the contract as being a condition and provided that Wickman would send a sales person to each named company once a week to solicit sales. This imposed an obligation to make 1,400 visits in total. Wickman failed to make some of the visits and Schuler terminated the contract for breach of condition

Held: Despite the fact the contract had expressly stated the term was a condition, the House of Lords held that it was only a warranty. It would have been unfair and unreasonable to treat the term as a condition

Facts: There was a tenancy agreement, but it had no mention of the obligations of the council.

Held: The court implied a term, after a dispute arose, that the council had “to take reasonable care to keep [the flats] in reasonable repair and usability”

Facts: Seller of a car said the car was a later model than it really was

Held: This was held to be a representation (not a term) because the seller had NO specialist knowledge (he was a private seller)

Facts: The defendants were repairing the plaintiff's (i.e. claimant) ship, but damaged it during low tide.

Held: The court implied there was a term that the defendants would act with reasonable care to ensure the ship is not damaged. If the plaintiffs had knew about the potential risk to their ship they would have put it in the contract