Sometimes a Contracts question will present a fact pattern making it easy to determine if the common law should apply (as it does with service contracts) or the UCC (as it does with contracts for the sale of goods). Other times, it won't be so obvious because the contract will have elements that make it a service contract, and elements that make it a contract for the sale of goods. In this latter hybrid case, it's important to determine whether to apply the common law or the UCC since that determination may well influence the result of a given legal issue.
Thankfully, there's a test to apply that'll guide you, and there are usually points awarded for making this determination even before analyzing the more substantive issues. In contracts where both goods and services are involved, most courts consider the predominant purpose of the transaction in determining whether the UCC or the common law of contracts governs. The test is often referred to as the "predominant purpose test."
As an example, imagine a homeowner purchases goods and also purchases to have those goods installed. All of this is embedded within one contract. If the contract price is determined primarily by the labor costs of installing those goods then it's more likely that the predominant purpose of the contract is the installation (the service) and the common law should apply. But if the installation is secondary to the purchase of the goods (if the cost is primarily determined by the cost of the goods, and the installation is secondary), then applying the rules of the UCC is likely to be more appropriate.
In short, under the predominant purpose test, look at the transaction as a whole to identify the main objective. You'll want to apply a single body of law rather than splitting the contract into separate parts and applying the common law to some parts and the UCC to others. The single body of law to apply is dependent entirely on what the court determines is the main purpose of the contract.
No comments:
Post a Comment