Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
CASE STUDY

“It really is saving us a huge number of hours over the days, weeks and months. Having more relevant support at hand, not having to draft or review documents them from scratch - it all adds up.”

Southampton FC

Access all documents on Satisfactory quality

Satisfactory quality meaning

What does Satisfactory quality mean?
Satisfactory quality is the standard goods must meet on sale: what a reasonable person would accept, given the description, price and all the circumstances. In England & Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland it is an implied term by statute: sale of goods Act 1979, s 14(2) for B2B sales, and Consumer Rights Act 2015 (s 9 for goods; s 34 for digital content) for consumer contracts. The test covers fitness for common purposes, appearance and finish, freedom from minor defects, durability and safety. Defects drawn to the buyer’s attention, apparent on reasonable examination (including of a sample), or consistent with the agreed description and price, are excluded. Fitness for a particular purpose is a separate implied term where the buyer relies on the seller and states that purpose. Breach triggers remedies: for consumers, repair or replacement, price reduction, or the 30‑day short‑term right to reject; for B2B, rejection within a reasonable time and damages. In Ireland, the closest equivalents are “merchantable quality” under the Sale of Goods Act 1893 (as amended 1980) for non‑consumer sales, and conformity and quality/durability guarantees under the Consumer Rights Act 2022.
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

View the related News about Satisfactory quality

NEWS
English Commercial Court: 'Last shot' displaced—bespoke PO prevails over supplier GCs; SGA 1979 implied terms not excluded; exclusion clauses require clear words; CFR shipment point determines delivery and limitation

Tullow Ghana Ltd v Vallourec Oil and Gas France S.A.S [2025] EWHC 3059 (Comm) What was the background? This Commercial Court case centres on a protracted dispute about purportedly defective 7‑inch VAM TOP tubing provided for water‑injection wells in the Jubilee Oil Field, offshore Ghana. Tullow Ghana, which operates the field, sued the manufacturer, Vallourec Oil and Gas, for breach of contract and breach of implied terms under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (SGA 1979)—including that the tubing was of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose, free from minor defects, and durable—seeking damages of US$257,484,257. Vallourec denied fault, contending that any leakage was caused by excessive operational stresses rather than manufacturing defects. It further maintained that: its General Conditions of Export Sale (GCs) were incorporated into the parties’ contract; and clause 8 of the GCs curtailed its liability to replacement, repair, or refund, and excluded statutory and consequential damages...

Read More Right Arrow
NEWS
Settlement of UK High Court claim against Amazon Marketplace highlights CPA 1987 issues, EU Revised PLD platform liability expansion, and forthcoming UK product liability reform

Tresoldi v Amazon EU Sàrl , case number KB-2025-002852 Claim issued against Amazon in the UK A consumer injured by a power tool bought on Amazon Marketplace has brought what has been characterised as a ‘first of its kind’ claim against an online marketplace in the UK. The case contends that the tool—referenced in a 2023 Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) product safety report—was defective under CPA 1987. It is also said the claimant pursued breaches of contractual terms concerning satisfactory quality and fitness for purpose. Reports indicate the product was purchased before the OPSS safety alert, and the claimant sustained a finger injury in September 2022 that required partial amputation. Under CPA 1987, a person suffering personal injury caused wholly or in part by a defective product may seek compensation from: the producer of the product; an own-brander (white-labeller); an importer of the product into the UK...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Practice Notes about Satisfactory quality

PRACTICE NOTES
EU Orphan Medicinal Products: Regulatory Framework, Designation Criteria, EMA Procedures, Market Exclusivity and Derogations, Similarity and Clinical Superiority, Off-label Implications, Key Case Law and Proposed Reforms

Orphan medicinal products (OMPs) Orphan medicinal products (OMPs) are medicines intended to prevent, diagnose or treat rare medical disorders and conditions. Because patient numbers are extremely small, and in the absence of incentives, pharmaceutical firms may doubt whether sales would ever cover the research and development (R&D) costs of creating medical products to diagnose, prevent and treat such rare diseases. In EU law, ‘rare’ means affecting fewer than five in 10,000 people across the EU. Yet most rare diseases impact fewer than one in 100,000 individuals. Although each rare disease is uncommon, they carry notable public health significance and enduring relevance. It is estimated there are more than 6,000 rare diseases; thus, while each is infrequent, together they account for a substantial patient population, in aggregate roughly one in every 12 people in the EU (all rare diseases combined). Without incentives, developing and marketing OMPs is often not commercially feasible for pharmaceutical companies, and only about 5% of rare diseases currently have an authorised treatment option available at present....

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Digital content under the Consumer Rights Act 2015: UK standards, pre-contract information, tiered remedies, device damage and liability limits

Practice Note: Consumer Rights Act 2015—digital content This Practice Note examines the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA 2015) in the context of digital content, outlining the consumer’s statutory entitlements under CRA 2015 for contracts to supply such content. It considers the standards governing digital content and the remedies available: the right to repair or replacement, the right to a price reduction, the right to a refund, and the remedy for damage to a device or to other digital content. For a general overview of CRA 2015, including definitions of key terms such as ‘consumer’ and ‘trader’, see Practice Note: Consumer Rights Act 2015—summary. For how CRA 2015 applies to goods, services and unfair terms, see: Consumer Rights Act 2015—goods Consumer Rights Act 2015—services Consumer Rights Act 2015—unfair terms Helpful guidance on CRA 2015’s application to digital content has been provided by the Chartered Trading Standards Institute (CTSI Guidance) and the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy, now part of...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Materials and workmanship in construction: SGSA 1982, CRA 2015, DPA 1972, UCTA 1977, implied terms, exclusions, deleterious materials, testing/inspection, conflicts, and standard form provisions (JCT, NEC, FIDIC)

Materials, goods and workmanship Employers place significant emphasis on the contractor’s materials and craft on a build, since, alongside the design, they dictate the calibre of the finished scheme—and whether the contractor has achieved the stipulated level of workmanship, and/or selected materials that satisfy the contract’s quality criteria, is frequently at the heart of disputes about defective work and alleged shortfalls. The building contract typically sets out comprehensive clauses on workmanship benchmarks and on the categories and grades of goods and materials the employer requires the contractor to use on the project. While the technical documents attached to the building contract usually contain most of the particulars and prescriptions, the principal contractual terms commonly also address the employer’s expectations regarding materials and workmanship. As noted in this Practice Note, numerous express terms in a building contract (or a sub-contract to the primary building contract) will echo statutory obligations on quality and fitness for purpose, mirroring legal requirements; the same approach is adopted in certain standard form construction contracts, where...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Precedents about Satisfactory quality

PRECEDENTS
Template website terms and conditions for online sale of goods to consumers (B2C) — England and Wales

Before purchasing anything on our website, please read these important terms and conditions and ensure they include everything you expect and nothing you are unwilling to accept. Summary of some of your key rights: The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 state that, in most cases, you can change your mind within 14 days of receiving your goods and receive a full refund. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 requires goods to be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality. During the expected lifespan of your product, you are entitled to the following: up to 30 days: if your goods are faulty, you can get a refund; up to six months: if repair or replacement is not possible, you are entitled to a full refund in most cases; up to six years: if the goods do not last a reasonable length of time, you may be entitled to some money back. This is a summary...

Read More Right Arrow
PRECEDENTS
Precedent: Off‑premises (doorstep) business‑to‑consumer supply of goods terms and conditions — England and Wales

Before purchasing from us, please review these important terms and conditions to confirm they include everything you expect and nothing you would be unwilling to accept. Summary of some of your key rights: Under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013, you generally have 14 days from receiving your goods to change your mind and obtain a full refund. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 states that goods must be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality. Across the expected lifespan of your product, you are entitled to the following: up to 30 days: if your goods are faulty, you can get a refund; up to six months: if it cannot be repaired or replaced, you are entitled to a full refund in most cases; up to six years: if the goods do not last a reasonable length of time, you may be entitled to some money back. This is a brief outline of...

Read More Right Arrow
PRECEDENTS
On-premises (in-store) business-to-consumer supply of goods and services: precedent terms and conditions (England and Wales)

Please read these important terms and conditions before buying anything from us and ensure they cover everything you require and nothing you are unwilling to accept. Summary of some of your key rights: If there is an issue with services we deliver, the remedies for services apply. If there is an issue with your goods, the remedies for goods apply. In practice, some remedies may overlap, and we will seek to agree the most appropriate way forward with you. Summary of some of your key rights (goods): The Consumer Rights Act 2015 requires goods to be as described, suitable for their purpose and of satisfactory quality. During the expected lifespan of your product you are entitled to: up to 30 days: where your goods are faulty, you may claim a refund; up to six months: if repair or replacement is not possible, in most cases you’re due a full refund; up to six years: if your goods do not last a...

Read More Right Arrow