[1987] Q.B. 933
Court of Appeal
Mustill LJ
‘Unfortunately it proved that the yellow vehicle was no more satisfactory than its predecessor. It is now known, as the judge found in his judgment, that by the time the vehicle was sold to the plaintiffs it had deteriorated to the extent that oil seals at vital junctions were no longer sound and that the defective seals permitted the loss of significant quantities of oil. It also proved to be the case that the engine and the gearbox of the vehicle had defects at the time of sale. After a series of inspections and attempts at repair it was found as late as June 1982, some six months after the delivery of the second vehicle, that the engine was still misfiring at all road speeds and that excessive noise was emitting from the gearbox and the transfer box. In addition the vehicle was suffering, as the judge has found, from substantial defects as regards the bodywork…
[After 6 months the plaintiff] gave notice to the dealer that the car was rejected…
With these factors in mind, can it be said that the Range Rover as delivered was as fit for the purpose as the buyer could reasonably expect? The point does not admit of elaborate discussion. I can only say that to my mind the defects in engine, gearbox and bodywork, the existence of which is no longer in dispute, clearly demand a negative answer.’
Declaration that Range Rover validly rejected by plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs to recover from defendants sums paid in respect of purchase of Range Rover together with value of vehicle given in part exchange, to be assessed if not agreed.