English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

Caveat emptor, as an instrument for allocating loss, was well adapted to a business era when equally knowledgeable parties dealt in homely chattels at arm's length. Solution of today's problems of consumer protection and allocation of loss involves, however, a reappraisal of contemporary social and economic fact. In view of the modem consumer's inequality of technical knowledge, his inability to test highly processed goods except by use, and his dependent bargaining position in a spiderweb distribution system, unmitigated caveat emptor becomes mercantile absurdity. The long struggle of enlightened courts to readjust the balance in favor of the unprotected consumer is only now reaching fruition. The dramatic evolution of warranty law from its humble origins in tort and the action on the case for deceit, has been characterized and, indeed, made possible by its increasing assimilation of contract principles 3 As tort concepts of fault and negligence have been further abandoned, seller's obligation to deliver goods of the "warranted" kind and quality has tended to become absolute,4 and it has become possible'to experiment with techniques for adequate consumer protection and the imposition of losses upon those best able to prevent and to absorb them.5 The Uniform Sales Act of 1906,6 codifying the better case law of the nineteenth century, is conceded to have advanced warranty law by the in-

Warranties of Kind and Quality under the Uniform Revised Sales Act