The defendant carried on a car hire business as opposed to the business of a motor car vendor or dealer. He had a fleet of twenty-four cars and made a regular practice of selling his hire cars when he had had them for about two years or when the condition of a particular vehicle warranted it. He did not buy or sell the cars at a profit but simply for the purposes of replacing his fleet vehicles from time to time.
Held: The expression ‘in the course of a trade or business’ was not used in the broadest sense. The transaction in issue was caught. It was ‘an integral part of the business carried on as a car hire firm’. The defendant’s business as part of its normal practice bought and disposed of cars.
Judges:
Lord Parker CJ
Citations:
[1970] 1WLR 1375
Statutes:
Trade Descriptions Act 1968 1(1)(b)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Stevenson and Another v Rogers CA 8-Dec-1998
The defendant, who carried on the business of a fisherman, sold his vessel Jelle to the plaintiff with a view to having a new boat built to his requirements. In the event he bought a replacement vessel which he continued to use for his business. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime, Consumer
Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.187300