Law 421 Week 4 Case Study

1206 Words5 Pages
Week 4 Learning Team D LAW /421 Week 4 Team D In this case Learning Team will analyze the contract that was brought forth between Armstrong (seller) and GCI (buyer). The process of analyzing will include who is responsible for what and what articles of the UCC protect whom. In this case scenario when Armstrong’s manager wrote in that it would be a destination contract and both parties signed it at that moment it changed who was liable for the press if any issues would arise before delivered to the client (GCI) (Melvin, 2011). Under the destination contract it states that the company/organization and/or person selling the goods must deliver to a specific location and in good working conditions if any complications should take place before it is delivered then the seller…show more content…
Armstrong is obligated to transfer and deliver conforming goods to GCI. Conforming goods requires that the goods must conform exactly to the agreed upon description provided by the buyer to the seller. This action is referred to as tender of delivery and the UCC obligates the seller to have or tender the specific goods requested. By substituting the third part of the press Armstrong has not yet breached the contract but has not provided perfect tender. Armstrong’s failures to meet their obligation gives GCI three options: they may reject the entire shipment of goods, accept the shipment of goods as is, or accept any number of commercial units and reject the rest of the goods, (Melvin 2011, pg. 192). One right that is available to Armstrong is referred to as the cure. The cure is the UCC’s way of promoting the completion of an original contract. It would allow Armstrong (the seller) the right or opportunity to repair or replace any goods that the buyer (GCI) has rejected as long as the time period for performance has not

More about Law 421 Week 4 Case Study

Open Document