Implied terms are not stated in a contract but are introduced in a contract by a statute.
1. The handset will correspond with description supplied at the time of sale. This is an implied term by the sales of good act as it has to correspond with the description on the box. Also statute would protect the customer and it should be what is said on the box. The sales of good act states where there is a sale of good by description there is an implied condition that the goods will correspond with the description. If the sales of good act did not exist then it would be unfair as for e. g.
If a customer bought a 3D TV from the Sony Centre and went home and set it up and then realised it was not a 3D TV, the customer could go back to Sony and ask for a refund or for another product that works. 2. The handset provided will be brand new in condition. This is an implied term as the customer paid for a brand new handset therefore it should be what is said on the box and the advertisement, and what the customer paid for. The sales of good act states that the goods must be sold at a satisfactory condition.
If the sales of good act did not state that then sellers would be selling products that are already used which would not be fair to customers. 3. The handset can be used to make and receive phone calls, send and receive text messages and provide internet usage. This is an implied term by the sales of good act as it has to correspond with what is being sold. Also, it is a condition because the handset needs to be able make and receive phone calls. Also, the sale of good act states that the goods must be fit for its purpose.
If the sales of good acts did not exist and people were buying products that were not working and were not fit for its purpose then it wouldn’t be fair as people were being conned. 4. The supplier or manufacturer of the handset accepts no liability for defective goods This is an unfair contract term where it is not fair that if the goods that a customer has bought are defective the manufacturer or supplier is not liable for it. The unfair contracts act states that there should be resources available to cover the liability i. e. insurance.